Social media age verification laws in the United States

In 2022 California passed The California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act or AB 2273 which requires websites that are likely to be used by minors to estimate visitors ages to give them some amount of privacy control and on March 23, 2023, Utah Governor Spencer Cox signed SB 152 and HB 311 collective known as the Utah Social Media Regulation Act which requires age verification and if they are under 18 they have to get parental consent before making an account on any social media platform.

[8][9][10][11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20] Many, including the Electronic Frontier Foundation, American Civil Liberties Union and NetChoice, have criticized social media age verification laws because of the risk that they pose to privacy and having a burden on free speech as well as being ineffective.

It excludes platforms that social media company that allows a user to generate short video clips as well as interactive and virtual games.

[33] The Preliminary Injunction was later granted by Judge Timothy L. Brooks on August 31, 2023 with his reasoning being that the law was too vague and that Netchoice's members will suffer irreparable harm if the act goes into effect and that age restrictions were ineffective.

[40] After this on September 18, 2023, Federal Judge Beth Labson Freeman granted a preliminary injunction against the law blocking it from taking effect.

[50][51] On November 12, 2024 the trade association NetChoice sued the California Attorney General Rob Bonta to block SB 976 from taking effect.

[82][83] On June 28, 2023, John Bel Edwards signed SB 162 also known as the Secure Online Child Interaction and Age Limitation Act.

[15][85][86] The law excludes online email, video games, streaming services, news, sports, and entertainment as long as the content isn't user generated.

[87][88][89][90] NetChoice would make a testimony being in opposition against both laws and would send a veto request for HB 61, however they have yet to sue the state of Louisiana over them.

[91][92] On April 30, 2024, Tate Reeves who is the Governor of Mississippi signed HB 1126 also known as The Walker Montgomery Protecting Children Online Act.

[94] Section 6 of the law requires digital service providers to "prevent and mitigate" the posting of harmful content about issues such as eating disorders and substance abuse as well as any illegal activity.

[98] Later on July 1, 2024, Federal Judge Halil Suleyman Ozerden granted NetChoice's motion for a Preliminary Injunction against the law blocking it from going into effect.

[108][109][110] On July 4, 2023, Ohio Governor Mike DeWine signed HB 33 which was the bill for the fiscal years of 2024-2025 in Ohio a part of that bill was the Social Media Parental Notification Act which requires online gaming and social media platforms that are likely to be used by minors under 16 and requires users under 16 years of age to have verified parental consent before they can making a contract on a social media or online gaming platform and was going to take effect on January 15, 2024, the law is enforced by the Attorney General of Ohio.

[116] Four days later after NetChoice make its complaint on January 9, 2024, Chief Judge Algenon L. Marbley granted a Temporary Restraining Order, temporally blocking the law from going into effect.

[141] Section 509.053 of the law requires digital service providers are required to prevent the known minor's exposure to harmful material and other content that promotes, glorifies, or facilitates the following suicide, self-harm, or eating disorders; substance abuse; stalking, bullying, or harassment; or grooming, trafficking, child pornography, or other sexual exploitation or abuse.

[143] Later on, August 16, 2024, the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression helped four plaintiffs sue Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton as well.

[144] On August 30, 2024, Federal Judge Robert Pitman would grant Computer and Communications Industry Association and NetChoice a Preliminary Injunction against the laws "harmful to minors" section of it.

[153] The bills that amended the Utah Social Media Regulation Act were SB 194 and HB 464 and were signed on March 13, 2024. the amendments removed the 10:30 pm – 6:30 pm curfew and changed it so that parental consent would only happen if a minor changed their privacy settings, it also replaced the age verification to age assurance that was at least 95% accurate.

They are also required to provide any privacy information, terms of service, policies, and community standards concisely and use language that children can understand.

[186][187] Later the bill was amended to exclude the parental consent for minors under 16, prohibiting anyone over 18 from messaging anyone under 18 as well as requiring platforms to filter cyberbullying.

[193][194] Section 48-2103 of the bill requires social media companies to not allow anyone under 18 years of age to have an account unless they have expressed consent from a parent or guardian.

The six no votes were Monica Kurth, Brian K. Lohse, Shannon Lundgren, Megan L. Srinivas, Phil Thompson, and Ross Wilburn.

Consumer can also bring civil action seeking actual damages or an amount equal to $2,500 for each violation of the bill if passed into law.

It excluded user generated content that was created by a federal, state, or local government or by a public or private school, college, or university from what was prohibited to be recommended to minors.

[234] On January 13, 2025, Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen and their Attorney General Mike Hilgers announced that the states legislature was going to introduce bills among them was the Parental Rights in Social Media Act.

[235][236] Four days later on January 17, 2025, the Parental Rights in Social Media Act was introduced as LB 383 by Tanya Storer by the request of the governor and was cosponsored by Beau Ballard, Carolyn Bosn, Stan Clouse, Rob Dover, Brian Hardin, Rick Holdcroft, Teresa Ibach, Kathleen Kauth, Loren Lippincott and Glen Meyer.

[238] The Attorney General of Nebraska can also enforce the law and bring fines to a social media company that are up to 2,500 dollars per violation of the Act.

[240] The Nevada Department of Health and Human Services shall establish recommendation of methods to social media platforms to obtain the affirmative consent of a verified parent or legal guardian, determine whether the age verification system by the social media platform is at least 95 percent effective at guessing the age of a user.

[246] The bill requires social media companies which it defines as any services that makes at least 100 million dollars and that allows anyone to create a public profile, establish an account, or register as a user for the primary purpose of interacting socially with others, upload or create posts or content, which may include, but is not limited to, user-generated short video clips of dancing, voiceovers, or other acts of entertainment and which isn't educational or informative, view posts, activity, or content of other account holders, and interact with other users.

[247] Social media companies aren't allowed to use dark patterns to lead or encourage minors to provide personal information beyond what personal information would otherwise be reasonably expected to be provided for that online service to forgo privacy protections or take any action that the online platform has actual knowledge of or willfully disregards that may result in substantial harm or is a privacy risk to minors.