California legislature passes law experts say could require ID for social media
A court ruling in Arkansas against a similar bill suggests SB 976 may not stand up to First Amendment scrutiny, which Newsom could use to veto the bill.
(The Center Square) - The California legislature passed a bill requiring social media age verification to prevent unauthorized use by minors involving addictive feeds or late night use. Technology experts warn the bill would effectively require users to provide ID to use social media, and thus threaten First Amendment freedom of speech and access to information.
SB 976, one of the last bills by State Sen. Nancy Skinner, D-Berkeley, who retired from the legislature at the end of the August session, now goes to California Gov. Newsom’s for approval. The bill would ban social media notifications to minors during school hours and between 12:00 AM and 6:00 AM without parental consent, require chronological, not algorithmic social media feed presented to minors without parental consent, and only allow these features if a social media company has "reasonably determined" the user is not a minor, or if a parent has consented.
The bill empowers the California Attorney General — in this case Rob Bonta, who sponsored the bill — to define what is considered “reasonable” by January 1, 2027, which has many concerned that this would mean tying highly private information such as government identification to social media use.
“SB 976 would effectively require social media companies to verify the identity and age of ALL users,” warned the Chamber of Progress in an opposition letter. “Many adult users reasonably would prefer not to share their identifying information with online services - creating an unpleasant dilemma for adult users: turn over sensitive personal data to access protected speech online, or forego enjoyment of that online service entirely.”
“The First Amendment stringently restricts governmental interference with both the editorial discretion of private entities and the rights of individuals, regardless of age, to access lawful expression,” continued the Chamber of Progress. “SB 976, through its content-based and speaker-based restrictions, unequivocally infringes upon these fundamental freedoms.”
A court ruling in Arkansas against a similar bill suggests SB 976 may not stand up to First Amendment scrutiny, which Newsom could use to veto the bill.
Bonta, on the other hand, encourages the public to think of the welfare of children at risk from social media addiction.
“Our children and teens are experiencing a public health crisis, caused by social media companies in their thirst for profits,” said Bonta in a statement. “In California, we take mental health seriously, we take children’s online safety seriously — and we know that we don’t have a minute to waste to protect our kids. In California, we move fast and fix things.”
The legislation featured unusual opposing and supporting coalitions of groups often at odds with each other. Opposing the measure is a coalition of business organizations, such as the California Chamber of Commerce, Netchoice and Technet, and civil rights organizations such as ACLU California Action, Civil Justice Association of California, and Equality California, and the Trevor Project. Supporting the measure were state education offices and parents’ groups.