Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Technology Social Media Children topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee approves bill creating private right of action for parents over social media harms to children
Summary
The committee voted to pass Senate Bill 6-12, which creates a civil private right of action for parents whose children suffer harm linked to social media platforms and sets prohibited-design standards and civil penalties for platforms that knowingly design features causing certain harms.
The House Judiciary Committee on Friday passed Senate Bill 6-12, a bill that creates a private right of action for parents and guardians to sue social media platforms when a child is harmed through features or designs the company "knew or should have known" would cause addiction, self-harm, or other specified harms.
Senator Tyler Deese, who presented the bill, said the measure is a tailored private-rights framework that aims to give parents a civil remedy when children are harmed online. “What this bill does is helps create a private right of action. The ability for parents if their children have been harmed online, it creates the ability for a suit to be filed,” Deese said.
The bill describes a list of prohibited activities and design practices and ties civil penalties to harms that range from addiction and eating disorders to suicide and attempted suicide, with larger damages available for more severe harms.
Committee members questioned the bill’s defensibility and enforceability. Representative Collins asked whether the sponsor had modeled the language on statutes already defended in other states; Deese said the bill borrows lessons from earlier state efforts and anticipates legal challenges. Representative Ashley Hudson asked how standards like “causes a user to develop an eating disorder” would be proven; Deese replied the courts and juries would decide negligence and liability in civil cases.
Representative Clowney pressed about compliance timelines and the difference between general traffic-driving features and designs that create addiction; Deese said the bill distinguishes lower-level civil penalties from higher damages for suicide-related harms and pointed to a companion bill (SB 6-11) that provides definitions used to assess addiction. Representative Moore asked about the distinction between lawful traffic-driving and sustaining addictive behavior; Deese referenced the companion bill’s definitions to address that concern.
Representative Hudson voiced reluctance during discussion, saying she worried that the bill’s breadth and lack of a compliance runway could impose substantial liability on platforms without giving them time to change. Nevertheless, the committee adopted the motion to pass; the transcript records the voice vote as "the ayes have it. Congratulations. You have passed your bill."
Why it matters: The bill would expand civil liability against large social media platforms and create a mechanism for parents to seek damages where they can show harm to children tied to platform design. Backers framed it as a tool to hold companies accountable for design choices that harm minors; critics warned of legal challenges and broad exposure without clear operational definitions.
What happens next: With committee passage, the bill moves forward in the legislative process.
Speakers quoted in this report are identified in committee testimony and include the bill sponsor and multiple representatives who questioned or commented on the measure.
