Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Social Media Age Verification topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Committee approves bill requiring age verification for social media accounts for minors

2232001 · February 5, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The House Government Modernization and Technology Committee passed House Bill 1275, sponsored by Representative Chad Caldwell, to require age verification for social media accounts for minors. Supporters cited youth mental-health harms; opponents raised privacy, free-speech and enforcement concerns. The measure passed the committee 7–1.

At a meeting of the House Government Modernization and Technology Committee, members voted 7–1 to pass House Bill 1275, a proposal by Representative Chad Caldwell that would require age verification for social media accounts for minors.

The bill’s sponsor, Representative Chad Caldwell, told the committee the measure is “content neutral” and aims to “put some guardrails on social media access for our kids.” He said the legislation is modeled on prior state bills and federal privacy discussions and argued the state has “a compelling interest to protect the youth of Oklahoma.”

The bill drew extended questions from committee members about implementation and legal limits. Vice Chair Hall asked whether a third-party verification system could provide anonymity so that social-media platforms would never receive identifying information. Caldwell replied that such systems exist and said, “there are absolute ways that we can do this today, where we protect, not only the anonymity you're talking about, but can protect the demographic information.”

Representative Stewart asked the sponsor to explain the bill’s intent; Caldwell pointed to studies and internal industry documents he said show harms to young people. He cited increases in self-harm and mental-health disorders and described the bill as similar in purpose to age restrictions on substances and other regulated products.

Opponents raised concerns about privacy, enforcement and parental rights. Representative Alonzo said he shared the sponsor’s concern about youth safety but warned the measure “might miss the mark, mainly because it could burden users who care about anonymity, privacy, [and] security online.” Representative Guyesh asked whether the bill would shift decision-making from parents to the state; Caldwell said he is “a pretty staunch advocate of parental rights” but argued the state has a compelling interest given the scale of harms he described.

Several members also questioned whether the bill could raise First Amendment issues. Caldwell pointed to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (1998) as precedent for regulating some online practices for minors and described the committee’s approach as “narrowly tailored” and “content neutral.”

After limited debate, the committee voted to give the bill a do-pass recommendation. Committee staff recorded the roll as 7 ayes and 1 nay and declared House Bill 1275 passed by committee vote.

The bill’s committee passage sends it forward in the legislative process for further consideration.