Poli Alert Politics & Civics
Related Articles
A bipartisan Senate bill that would ban children under 13 from accessing social media is facing strong opposition from tech industry trade groups and digital rights organizations, which argue that the measure is unconstitutional and overly restrictive.
The bill, co-sponsored by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii), passed the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee by voice vote on Feb. 5. The legislation has backing from both parties, signaling strong momentum.
“Kids need time to be kids to experience the real world, not to get lost in the virtual one,” Cruz said, defending the measure during a recent committee hearing.
The bill not only bans social media for children under 13 but also prohibits platforms from tracking online behavior or targeting content to users under 17. Additionally, schools would be required to block access to social media sites on their networks.
While the bill has moved swiftly through the Senate, previous efforts to regulate online platforms for minors have struggled in the House. A broader online safety bill passed the Senate last year with overwhelming support but stalled in the House, despite backing from Elon Musk, now head of the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE).
House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) have not committed to supporting the latest measure. Johnson has expressed general support for online safety regulations but has indicated he wants to coordinate with the Trump administration on final legislation.
Tech Industry and Digital Rights Groups Push Back
Despite bipartisan support, the bill faces stiff resistance from the tech industry and digital rights advocates, who argue it could violate constitutional protections and undermine parental authority.
NetChoice, a trade group representing major tech companies like Amazon, Google, and Meta, voiced concerns about government overreach.
“Banning young people under a certain age from accessing online services entirely and tightly limiting access for teens not only conflicts with the U.S. Constitution and creates serious privacy and surveillance concerns — it removes parents entirely from making the best decisions for their families,” NetChoice said in a statement.
Amy Bos, director of state and federal affairs at NetChoice, acknowledged that lawmakers have good intentions but warned that the bill’s requirements could jeopardize digital privacy.
“The bill’s in-effect requirements on access to protected information jeopardize all Americans’ digital privacy and endanger free speech online,” Bos said.
Instead of imposing broad restrictions, Bos argued that lawmakers should work with tech companies to improve digital safety and provide more resources to law enforcement to target online predators.
NetChoice has actively challenged online safety laws at both the state and federal levels. It recently sued to block Maryland’s “Age-Appropriate Design Code” law, which restricts platforms from using algorithms to prolong screen time for minors. The trade group has also successfully challenged similar laws in California and other states, arguing that such regulations impose unconstitutional restrictions on free speech.
The bill has also drawn criticism from civil rights and free speech organizations. The Center for Democracy and Technology, the ACLU, the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and other advocacy groups sent a joint letter to Cruz expressing their opposition.
“While protecting children online is imperative, this bill — if enacted — would actively undermine child safety, harm marginalized youth, erode privacy, and impose unconstitutional restrictions on young people’s ability to engage online,” the letter stated.
Legal and Political Challenges Ahead
The measure’s future remains uncertain as it heads to the House, where past efforts have stalled amid industry pushback and legal concerns. The Supreme Court has recently ruled in favor of tech companies in content moderation cases, reinforcing First Amendment protections for social media platforms.
With legal battles over online regulation ongoing, the fate of the Cruz-Schatz bill will likely depend on whether lawmakers can navigate growing concerns over digital privacy, free speech, and the role of government in regulating internet access for minors.
