• by Wendy Davis  @wendyndavis, October 24, 2023

Dozens of activist parents who lost children due to suicide, drug overdoses or accidents following viral "challenges" are making a new lobbying push this week for the Kids Online Safety Act, which would regulate how platforms display ads and content to teens.

“We know the internet is vital for kids to stay connected with their friends and classmates. That is why it's crucial to prioritize the development of safe online environments,” dozens of parents say in a letter to Senate leaders.

The parents who signed the letter say they lost children due to harms associated with social media: Some committed suicide after being bullied online, while others died of fentanyl poisoning from drugs purchased through social media, and some were fatally injured after attempting a "challenge" involving a dangerous stunt.

“We have lost our children because time and time again, Big Tech chose to prioritize profits over the safety and well-being of young people,” the parents write.

The controversial Kids Online Safety Act would require social platforms to take “reasonable measures” to prevent potential harms associated with social media use when displaying material to users under the age of 17. The bill tasks the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general with enforcement.

Some youth advocates including Fairplay -- which, along with the parents, organized the new lobbying effort -- the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Center for Digital Democracy support the bill, arguing it will help protect teens from eating disorders, online bullying and other harms.

The Senate Commerce Committee advanced the bill in July, but the measure hasn't yet been scheduled for a vote by the full Senate.

The supporters plan to meet Tuesday and Wednesday with Senators Richard Blumenthal (D-Connecticut), Marsha Blackburn (R-Tennessee), Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) and Ted Cruz (R-Texas), as well as Representatives Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-Washington), Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-New Jersey), and Kathy Castor (D-Florida).

The new lobbying push comes one month after a different group -- parents of trangender teens -- asked Congress to abandon the bill.

Those parents said the proposed law would empower conservative attorneys general to “dictate what content younger users can see on social media, cutting our kids off from lifesaving online resources and community.”

That group also noted that some right-wing officials are already “working to ban gender affirming health care that saves kids’ lives, criminalize drag performances, and label families that accept our children as 'groomers' and 'child abusers.'” 

Numerous digital rights organizations including the Electronic Frontier Foundation also oppose the law, arguing it would violate the First Amendment.

One concern is that the bill could prevent teens from accessing content protected by free speech principles. In general, the First Amendment prohibits the government from suppressing a range of potentially harmful content -- including photos associated with eating disorders, to “hate speech,” to material discussing drug use.

Opponents also argue the measure would significantly encourage platforms to verify all users' ages -- which would violate adults' and teens' First Amendment right to access information anonymously.

A California law that would have imposed some of the same requirements as the Kids Online Safety Act was blocked last month on First Amendment grounds by U.S. District Court Judge Beth Labson Freeman in the Northern District of California.

The California law requires online companies likely to be accessed by users under 18 to prioritize their “best interests” and “well-being.” That measure also prohibits those companies from collecting or sharing their personal information -- unless doing so is necessary to provide a specific service that the minor is actively using, or unless collecting or sharing the information is in minors' best interests.

The New York Times Company was among the groups that urged Freeman to block the law, arguing that would have unconstitutionally restricted news organizations' ability to distribute articles to minors, and would have limited their ability to access the material.

California's attorney general is appealing Freeman's order to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.