HR-7399-119
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Sponsored by Anna Luna (R-FL)
What it does
This bill would prohibit social media platforms from knowingly allowing children under 13 to create or maintain accounts, and would require platforms to delete those accounts and any personal data collected from those users. It would also bar platforms from using automated recommendation systems based on personal data for users under 17. Schools receiving discounted internet service through the federal E-Rate program would be required to block social media access on school networks and devices, and to submit internet safety policies to the FCC. The Federal Trade Commission would enforce the platform restrictions, and states could bring civil actions on behalf of affected residents.
Who benefits
Children under 13 who would be shielded from social media platforms and the data collection practices associated with them. Parents and guardians who want stronger legal backing for limiting their children's social media use. Researchers and child health advocates who argue algorithmic content recommendations harm minors. Schools that already have filtering policies, which would receive clearer federal guidance. Competitors to major social media platforms — such as educational technology companies and videoconferencing services — which are explicitly excluded from the bill's restrictions. Mental health professionals who treat adolescents for social media-related harms.
Who is hurt
Social media platforms, which would face compliance costs, mandatory account deletions, and restrictions on their core algorithmic recommendation products for a large user segment. Teenagers aged 13–16 who use social media for communication, creative expression, or community-building and would lose access to personalized content feeds. Small and mid-size social media companies that may lack resources to build robust age-verification systems. Schools in lower-income districts that rely heavily on E-Rate-funded devices and networks, which could face reimbursement obligations if compliance is imperfect. Advertisers who target younger demographics on social media platforms. Content creators whose reach to younger audiences would be reduced.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that a growing body of research — including a 2023 U.S. Surgeon General advisory — links heavy adolescent social media use to increased rates of anxiety, depression, and body image disorders, particularly among girls. They contend that algorithmic recommendation systems are specifically designed to maximize engagement in ways that exploit developing brains, and that the bill's prohibition on data-driven content promotion for under-17 users directly targets this mechanism. They further argue that the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), enacted in 1998, is outdated and that this bill modernizes federal child protection standards for the current social media landscape.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that age verification systems are technically unreliable and would require platforms to collect more sensitive personal data — such as government IDs — from all users, potentially creating new privacy risks that outweigh the intended protections. They contend that restricting algorithmic content for users under 17 raises serious First Amendment concerns, as the Supreme Court held in Moody v. NetChoice (2024) that platforms have protected editorial discretion over content curation, and that government-mandated changes to those systems may constitute compelled speech. They also argue that the bill's school filtering requirements could block legitimate educational and civic content, and that enforcement burdens would fall disproportionately on under-resourced schools.
Constitutional context
The bill's restrictions on algorithmic content recommendations for minors touch active First Amendment territory: Moody v. NetChoice (2024) held that platforms' content moderation and curation decisions are protected editorial discretion, raising questions about whether mandating changes to recommendation systems constitutes unconstitutional compelled speech. The bill's data deletion and age-verification requirements also implicate the Fourth Amendment's digital privacy framework established in Carpenter v. United States (2018), particularly if compliance requires platforms to collect and retain more identifying data about users.
Checks and balances
The FTC gains new enforcement authority over social media platforms; the FCC gains a publication role for school safety policies; Congress retains oversight of both agencies, and courts — applying independent judgment post-Loper Bright — would review any agency rules implementing the bill's provisions.
Historical precedent
The Children's Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA, 1998) similarly prohibited online platforms from collecting personal data from children under 13 without parental consent, and has been the primary federal framework for child online privacy for over two decades.