Premium Only Content

Florida's New Social Media Ban Faces First Amendment Challenge In Courts
The state of Florida has passed a major new law that limits social media use for children, banning popular apps for anyone under the age of 14. But can this law stand up in court? Mike Papantonio & Farron Cousins discuss more.
Check out our merch by visiting our store: https://www.buyrof.com/
Subscribe to our podcast: http://www.ROFPodcast.com
Become a member today!: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYWIEbibRcZav6xMLo9qWWw/join
Support us by becoming a monthly patron on Patreon, and help keep progressive media alive!: https://www.patreon.com/TheRingofFire
Spread the word! LIKE and SHARE this video or leave a comment to help direct attention to the stories that matter. And SUBSCRIBE to stay connected with Ring of Fire's video content!
Support Ring of Fire by subscribing to our YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/theringoffire
Be sociable! Follow us on:
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/RingofFireRadio
Twitter: https://twitter.com/RingofFireMedia
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/ringoffirenetwork/
*This transcript was generated by a third-party transcription software company, so please excuse any typos.
The state of Florida has passed a major new law that limits social media use for children banning popular apps for anyone under the age of 14. But can this law stand up in court? Okay. So here's what you hear in response to this. It makes, again, I gotta look at it from a constitutional standpoint. They're saying, oh, this Wasserman, they interviewed some guy named Wasserman about the First Amendment. Yeah. It's a First Amendment issue. But you begin every analysis by saying, is there a standard where the First Amendment issue can be trumped? Where you can say, yeah, First Amendment's important, but health, safety and welfare concerns are more important than that. And so for this, to say that this is simply gonna be analyzed from a First Amendment standpoint is absurd. It's a ridiculous thing for this guy to say. Pick it up from there.
Yeah. So what we've got in the state of Florida, bipartisan legislation, Democrats and Republicans passed this legislation saying, if you're under the age of 14, social media apps are off limits. 14 and 15 years old, you do it with parents' consent, 16 and up, no problem there. So that's the law and it goes into effect January 1st, 2025. And the critics of the law, which in spirit, I like what the law's doing because I think it's necessary. But the critics of it are, like you said, they're saying, no, it's a First Amendment issue. But at least, to the only time I'll probably ever credit the government here in Florida, they're saying, no, listen, we have a duty to protect, like you say, with the police powers.
Health, safety and welfare, police powers. Right.
And we have reports off the charts of children being harmed by these social media apps. You and I have sat here and talked about some of the horrific things happen.
Oh, dozens of stories.
So that's why, listen, I don't think this is a violation of First Amendment rights when you consider the police powers, and I think they may be going after the wrong group. It's not the kids. They really should be going after the social media companies themselves. But if we can't get that at this point, maybe this is the route to go.
Yeah. I thought the reporter did a terrible job on this story. He focused on one professor, Wasserman, and Wasserman tells the New Times, well, this is all a First amendment. Well, it's not. Okay. It's not. Otherwise, how would you even control pornographic material? How would you control voting? How would you control driver's license? How would you control alcohol or cigarettes? There's some things that fall squarely within health, safety and welfare. And they fall under something called strict scrutiny. Okay. First Amendment is what you would regard as, when an appellate court looks at it, they look at it with strict scrutiny. The assumption is that this violates the First Amendment. You start there, but you say, wait, is there something that overpowers that? And of course, we wouldn't have any of these laws. We wouldn't have cigarettes. We wouldn't have voting. We wouldn't have alcohol where we're driven by age. We'd have none of this. If all you said, or driving, you'd have none of it if you just said, okay, well, let's look at the First Amendment aspect of something like pornography, or let's look at the First Amendment of, you can virtually say that anything, you have some First Amendment in your expression, your desire to do something. But it's just a wrong analysis. I don't know. I think that this was defeated in Arkansas, wasn't it?
Yeah. And Utah's got one that's currently going through the courts. But again, they're staying to the strict First Amendment, yes or no questions. They're not trying to make the good argument, which is, we have seen the data.
-
4:09
America's Lawyer
1 day agoSilent Epidemic Of Corruption Plagues Law Enforcement In Trump's America
101 -
LIVE
VINCE
2 hours agoINCOMING! Trump Set To Reveal The Deep State's Darkest Secrets TODAY | Episode 87 - 07/17/25
38,645 watching -
LIVE
Bannons War Room
4 months agoWarRoom Live
14,022 watching -
UPCOMING
The Big Mig™
3 hours agoPOLITICAL FIRESTORM: DOJ FIRES Federal Prosecutor Maurene Comey
2024 -
LIVE
LFA TV
14 hours agoLFA TV ALL DAY STREAM - THURSDAY 7/17/25
3,649 watching -
1:11:30
Dear America
2 hours ago1 MILLION Illegals Have “Self-Deported”!! IT’S WORKING!! + Trump Calls Epstein List a HOAX?!
88.4K86 -
LIVE
Badlands Media
4 hours agoBadlands Daily: July 17, 2025
5,053 watching -
LIVE
Wendy Bell Radio
6 hours agoMAGA Wants REVENGE
9,227 watching -
LIVE
Matt Kohrs
10 hours agoMARKET OPEN: Bounce or Bust?! || Live Trading
732 watching -
LIVE
The Mike Schwartz Show
2 hours agoTHE MIKE SCHWARTZ SHOW with DR. MICHAEL J SCHWARTZ 07-17-2025
4,186 watching