California Assembly votes in favor of age limit on social media accounts
The California Assembly on Thursday overwhelming voted in favor of a bill that would prohibit children under 16 years old from having a social media account, setting up what is likely to continue to be a tough battle over the coming months.
“Look around the room everybody — we’re making history,” said the bill’s author, Speaker pro Tem Josh Lowenthal, D-Long Beach, before the vote.
The measure, which now goes to the Senate, is just one in a series of efforts by California legislators, and those in other states, to place restrictions on social media companies and their platforms. The businesses have faced increased scrutiny from politicians and in courtrooms in the face of rising rates of depression and suicide among young people.
Assembly Bill 1709 would allow the California attorney general to adopt regulations and to bring lawsuits against any company that “offers users or provides users with an addictive feed as a significant part of the service provided by that internet website, online service, online application, or mobile application.”
Support for the bill was bipartisan. Assemblymember David Tangipa, R-Clovis, who previously voted against the measure out of concerns about the role of government regulation, said he changed his mind after talking with Lowenthal earlier in the week.
“I think about my nieces and nephews going through this,” Tangipa said.
Other legislators invoked their children when urging their colleagues to vote in favor of the measure.
“Young minds are just not equipped to deal with these predatory practices,” said Assemblymember Diane Papan, D-San Mateo. “By cutting this off at a certain age, I think we are going to the heart of the matter.”
The action would follow Australia, which banned children under 16 years old from having social media accounts, the first such national limit. But legislators will need to clear significant hurdles to get there.
Opposition from industry, civil liberty groups
The bill has faced opposition from civil liberty and LGBTQ+ groups as well as trade groups representing social media companies including Meta, TikTok and Snap Inc. Groups raised First Amendment concerns and also said it could jeopardize the well-being of young people who find safety and community in online spaces.
“Our members are committed to being a part of the solution to improving youth mental health in California and beyond, which is why they continuously update safety features to protect young people online,” said Robert Boykin, a lobbyist for TechNet, one of the technology groups opposing the bill. “With that in mind, we urge the Legislature to consider more targeted, evidence-based approaches that focus on specific risks, strengthen parental control tools and preserve privacy while supporting youth well-being.”
“No matter how many times the California Legislature rehashes their unconstitutional policy prescriptions, they can’t seem to follow the First Amendment,” said Zach Lilly, a director of government affairs for NetChoice, one of the technology trade groups opposing the bill.
Fierce lobbying against the bill is likely to ramp up as the bill works through the Senate. The Legislature has until Aug. 31 to pass the measure, and it would then go to Gov. Gavin Newsom.
