• by Wendy Davis , Yesterday

Florida has sued TikTok for allegedly violating a controversial state law prohibiting platforms with “addictive features” from allowing anyone under the age of 14 to create or maintain accounts, and requires those platforms to obtain parental consent before allowing 14- or 15-year-olds to create or maintain accounts.

"Time is up for TikTok," Florida State Attorney General James Uthmeier said Monday in a video posted on X.

"TikTok happens to be one of the most egregious social media applications when it comes to the dangers that are there at the fingertips of kids," he said, adding that the service utilizes features such as "unlimited scrolling," "push notifications" and "videos that just go nonstop."

"It's designed to keep kids stuck on those screens for hours and hours a day," he said.

"We are going to get our kids their lives back," he added, punctuating his remarks by pounding the podium.

Uthmeier is seeking monetary penalties and an injunction requiring TikTok to comply with Florida's restrictions on teen accounts.

A TikTok spokesperson stated Monday that the company has "been engaging constructively and in good faith" with the attorney general, and has "notified users under 14 in Florida that their accounts will be suspended."

"We're continuing to update our platform in Florida in response to state law. We are evaluating the state’s complaint and are prepared to defend our strong record on minor safety," the spokesperson added.

The state's complaint, filed in St. Lucie County Circuit Court, accuses TikTok of "openly and knowingly" violating Florida's social-media law (HB3) by allowing 13-year-olds to create accounts, and by failing to seek parental consent before allowing 14- and 15-year-olds to have accounts.

The law's restrictions apply to platforms that display "like" counts, automatically play videos, or have other allegedly addictive features.

The statute also only applies to a platform if at least 10% of users under the age of 16 spend at least two hours per day on average at that platform.

That statute took effect last November, after a divided federal appellate panel ruled 2-1 that the restrictions probably did not violate the First Amendment.

"The law does not apply at all to older minors and tailors its provisions to the ages of the young minors whose access it does restrict," Circuit Judge Elizabeth Branch wrote in an opinion joined by Judge Barbara Lagoa.

"Rather than blocking children from accessing social media altogether, HB3 simply prevents them from creating accounts on platforms that employ addictive features," Branch added in the decision, which lifted an injunction that was issued on First Amendment grounds in June 2025 by U.S. District Court Judge Mark Walker in Tallahassee.

Circuit Judge Robin Rosenbaum dissented from the decision to allow the law to go into effect, writing that the statute imposes "substantial restrictions" on minors' First Amendment rights.

"When it comes to speaking online, the Act effectively prohibits many minors from speaking at all," Rosenbaum wrote.

The attorney general's complaint also includes a claim that TikTok violates a state consumer protection law in several ways -- including by using design features "known to promote compulsive, prolonged, and unhealthy use by children," and by failing to disclose that it allegedly hosts "large amounts of sexualized, drug-related, and other mature content."

Some specific allegations have been blacked out in the complaint, which itself carries the following unusual statement in a footnote: "Warning: This Complaint is NSFW -- much like TikTok is not safe for kids." 

Last year, Uthmeier separately sued Snap for allegedly violating the social media restrictions, and sought an injunction requiring Snap to comply with the restrictions on teen accounts.

Walker rejected that request. Uthmeier's office has appealed Walker's ruling to the 11th Circuit, which hasn't yet issued a decision.

Florida is one of several states that recently have passed laws restricting teens' use of social media.

Other states with comparable laws include Arkansas, Louisiana, Georgia, Mississippi, Utah, Ohio, Texas and Tennessee.

Tech industry groups have challenged those laws on First Amendment grounds, and most district court judges have blocked enforcement.

But states have appealed those injunctions, and so far appellate courts have allowed laws in Mississippi as well as Florida to take effect.

A district court judge in Tennessee also allowed that state's law to take effect, but suggested he might reconsider if state officials threatened to sue platforms over alleged violations.