HR-7433-119
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
What it does
The Kids Off Social Media Act would prohibit social media platforms from allowing children under a specified age (likely 13, based on the bill's title and existing COPPA framework) to create accounts or access their services. It would require platforms to verify users' ages and remove minors who are already using the platforms. The bill would likely impose obligations on platforms to enforce these restrictions and may establish penalties for non-compliance.
Who benefits
Parents who want stronger legal tools to limit their children's social media use. Child safety advocates and researchers who argue social media harms youth mental health. Younger children who would be shielded from platform exposure. Competing platforms or services designed specifically for children with age-appropriate content. Mental health professionals who treat adolescents for social media-related conditions.
Who is hurt
Minors who use social media for communication, education, activism, or community-building and would lose access. Teenagers who rely on platforms for social connection, particularly LGBTQ+ youth who may use online spaces as a primary support network. Social media companies that would face compliance costs and potential loss of a user segment. Advertisers targeting younger demographics. Small creators and educators who reach young audiences through social media. Families in rural or isolated areas where social media serves as a key social outlet for children.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that peer-reviewed research, including a 2019 study in JAMA Pediatrics and the U.S. Surgeon General's 2023 advisory, links heavy social media use among adolescents to increased rates of anxiety, depression, and self-harm — particularly among girls. They contend that platforms have repeatedly failed to self-regulate and that a federal age restriction is necessary to protect children from algorithmically amplified harmful content, predatory behavior, and addictive design features that platforms have knowingly deployed.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that effective age verification requires collecting sensitive personal data — such as government IDs — from all users, creating a massive new surveillance infrastructure that threatens the privacy of adults and minors alike. They contend that under Packingham v. North Carolina (2017), restricting minors' access to the internet's "modern public square" raises serious First Amendment concerns, and that the bill may be overbroad, sweeping in educational and community platforms alongside the entertainment-focused ones the bill targets.
Constitutional context
The First Amendment is directly implicated: Packingham v. North Carolina (2017) held that the internet is the "modern public square" and that broad restrictions on access fail First Amendment scrutiny. Moody v. NetChoice (2024) further established that platforms have protected editorial discretion, meaning mandated removal of minor users could constitute compelled speech or action. Age verification requirements that collect biometric or identity data also raise Fourth Amendment digital privacy concerns under Carpenter v. United States (2018).
Checks and balances
Congress would grant enforcement authority likely to the FTC or a designated agency; post-Loper Bright (2024), courts would independently review any agency rules implementing the bill rather than deferring to agency interpretations, and platforms could challenge the law under the First and Fourth Amendments.
Historical precedent
The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA, 1998) similarly restricted data collection from children under 13 online and has faced ongoing enforcement and scope debates; several states, including California (Age-Appropriate Design Code, 2022) and Arkansas (Social Media Safety Act, 2023), have passed analogous laws that are currently being challenged in federal court.