Florida Lawmakers Considering Fake News Legislation

For the third consecutive year, Florida lawmakers are advancing legislation aimed at compelling media outlets to remove online content deemed "false" and making it easier for individuals to sue journalists and news organizations for defamation. This effort, reflected in bills like HB 667 and SB 752 during the 2025 legislative session, builds on prior attempts to reshape defamation laws in the state, raising significant concerns among First Amendment advocates about its potential to chill free speech.

The proposed legislation requires media outlets—such as newspapers, TV stations, or online platforms—to permanently delete articles from their websites within a short timeframe (often 10 days) if notified that the content contains false or outdated information. This applies even if only a minor detail is inaccurate, potentially forcing the removal of entire stories. If outlets fail to comply, they lose their "fair report privilege," a legal protection that typically shields them from defamation lawsuits when reporting on official proceedings or public records. The bills also allow lawsuits to be filed up to 20 years after publication, a significant extension of typical statutes of limitations.

Supporters, including sponsors like Rep. J.J. Grow (R-Inverness) and co-sponsor Rep. Allison Tant (D-Tallahassee), argue that the law addresses the lasting harm caused by the internet’s permanence. They cite cases where individuals, cleared of criminal charges, remain stigmatized by outdated arrest reports online. For example, prominent Tallahassee lawyer Barry Richard, married to Tant, has championed the bill, noting a client whose life was impacted by a seven-year-old story despite exoneration. Democrats like Rep. Michele Rayner (D-St. Petersburg) have also backed it, questioning why media would resist removing falsehoods.

Critics, however, warn of overreach. The bills’ broad language mandates removal based on a “reasonable person” standard for falsity—lacking clear definition—and doesn’t require the content to be defamatory, just inaccurate. This could force outlets to erase historically accurate reports (e.g., initial crime coverage) if later developments, like dropped charges, render them "false" in hindsight. The First Amendment Foundation’s Bobby Block has called it a threat to factual reporting, arguing that “inconvenient truths” like O.J. Simpson’s car chase could be wiped from digital archives. The ACLU of Florida and others highlight the risk of censoring speech, as even minor errors could trigger takedowns, burdening smaller outlets with legal costs and compliance.

The legislative push follows earlier efforts in 2023 and 2024, backed by Gov. Ron DeSantis, to lower defamation thresholds, such as presuming malice from anonymous sources. While those bills faltered amid bipartisan resistance—including from conservative media fearing liberal lawsuits—the 2025 iteration has gained traction, passing the House Civil Justice Subcommittee 13-0 on March 27. It’s now headed to the Judiciary Committee, with its Senate counterpart, SB 752, also advancing despite some Democratic opposition. If enacted, the law could set a precedent for media accountability but risks clashing with constitutional protections, likely sparking court challenges.