Assembly committee advances multiple bills on social media safety, privacy and surveillance after hours of testimony

Sacramento — The California State Assembly Committee on Privacy and Consumer Protection heard testimony and took initial action on a package of bills on Tuesday addressing social media safety, online child protection, law‑enforcement access to tracking devices, workplace surveillance and government website security.

The committee advanced several measures to the next house committees while others were left “on call” as members flagged legal, technical and implementation concerns. The most prominent proposals would require social media apps to display warnings about mental‑health risks to intensive users, press device makers and app stores to transmit an age signal that apps can use to offer safer experiences for minors, and create a new state trust fund financed by a levy on in‑platform social media advertising.

Why it matters: Lawmakers, child‑safety advocates and mental‑health professionals told the committee that social platforms and targeted advertising have contributed to rising rates of anxiety, depression, eating disorders and suicidality among teens. Industry groups warned that some proposals could be impractical to implement, raise privacy or constitutional issues, or shift costs to small businesses.

The committee action, in brief: - AB 56 (Bauer‑Kahan): A bill to require social‑media apps to show a science‑based warning about potential mental‑health harms for heavy users was moved forward to the Assembly Judiciary Committee on a recorded 9‑0 tally. Supporters framed the warning as public‑health education; opponents, including industry trade groups, argued it risked constitutional challenges and “warning fatigue.”

- AB 1043 (Wicks): The Digital Age Assurance Act, which would require device makers/OS providers to provide a privacy‑protected mechanism at device setup that signals a user’s age bracket to apps and app stores, was the subject of competing testimony and remained under debate. Child‑safety groups and parents urged the measure as a way to make protections work across apps; some technology groups and civil‑liberties advocates warned of feasibility and privacy tradeoffs.

- AB 796 (Lowenthal): A proposal to create a “California Social Media Safety Trust Fund” financed by a recovery fee on social‑media ad revenue moved to the Revenue and Taxation Committee with preliminary committee support (7 votes recorded and left on call). Proponents said the fee would fund mental‑health services, school supports and research; opponents from business and advertising groups said it would raise costs for businesses and likely be legally challenged.

- AB 358 (Alvarez): A narrowly drawn amendment to the California Electronic Communications Privacy Act (CalECPA) to allow law enforcement to access surveillance or tracking devices left in a private space when the victim consents was advanced to the Appropriations Committee (recorded as supported by nine members). Supporters, including a prosecutor who handled a related case, said the change helps victims and speeds investigations; civil‑liberties groups (ACLU, EFF) said the change undercuts warrant protections and oversight.

- AB 1137 (Krell): An implementation bill to strengthen the state’s CSAM (child sexual abuse material) reporting mechanism, expanding who can report and adding human review/audit requirements, garnered survivor‑centered testimony and industry pushback on audits and disclosure rules. The measure was reported out of committee on a preliminary vote and put “on call” for absent members (7 votes at the time of the hearing).

- AB 1331 (El Wari): Legislation to limit invasive workplace surveillance (restricting tracking, facial recognition and continuous monitoring in private/off‑duty spaces) drew organized labor support and broad business opposition; the amended measure was advanced as amended and left on call with five recorded votes.

- AB 810 (Erwin): A bill requiring special districts and certain joint powers authorities to migrate public websites and official email addresses to a .gov or .ca.gov domain by 2031 prompted opposition from many water, park, and utility districts citing cost and branding concerns; the measure was advanced to Appropriations with the roll left open for absent members.

Supporters’ accounts and witnesses: Several hearings featured emotional testimony. Victoria Hinks, a mother who said her 16‑year‑old daughter died by suicide, told the committee “There’s not a bone in my body that doubts social media played a major role in her death,” and urged passage of AB 56. Mental‑health and child‑welfare groups described evidence and clinical experience tying heavy social‑media exposure to anxiety, depressive symptoms and disordered eating in adolescents. The International Center for Missing and Exploited Children told the committee that device‑level age signals would help prevent online enticement and exploitation.

Industry and civil‑liberties concerns: Tech industry trade groups (TechNet, CCIA) and platform allies argued several bills risk constitutional or practical problems. For AB 56 and similar content‑level mandates, witnesses warned that compelled speech could invite First Amendment and commerce‑clause litigation and that short delays or warnings are often ineffective. On AB 1043, tech representatives and the Chamber of Progress said requiring device makers or app stores to collect and broadcast age brackets is technically complex, could unintentionally encourage invasive age verification, and could expose children to privacy risks. Civil‑liberties groups urged caution on AB 358, arguing CALECPA’s warrant requirements protect Fourth Amendment rights and that the proposed exception could be abused.

Votes at a glance (as recorded in the hearing): - AB 56 (Bauer‑Kahan): Passed to Judiciary (recorded 9‑0 at time of vote). - AB 358 (Alvarez): Passed to Appropriations (recorded 9‑0 at time of vote). - AB 1137 (Krell): Passed to Judiciary (on call; 7 votes recorded at hearing). - AB 1331 (El Wari): Passed as amended to Judiciary (on call; 5 votes recorded at hearing). - AB 810 (Erwin): Passed to Appropriations (4 recorded votes at hearing; roll left open). - AB 796 (Lowenthal): Passed to Revenue & Taxation (on call; 7 votes recorded at hearing). - AB 1043 (Wicks): Heard; no final vote during this hearing.

What’s next: Each bill will proceed to the next committee listed on its calendar—Judiciary, Appropriations or Revenue & Taxation—where legal, constitutional and fiscal details will be scrutinized further. Several committee members urged additional stakeholder negotiations, especially on audit transparency (CSAM reporting), civil‑liberties concerns (warrant exceptions), the technical feasibility and privacy tradeoffs (age assurance), and the revenue and legal tests for the social‑media ad fee.

Context and follow‑ups: The hearing highlighted tensions that recur across digital‑policy debates—balancing child safety, free speech and privacy; ensuring operational feasibility; and identifying who pays for services that have societal costs. Advocates asked the Legislature to prioritize both fast‑acting educational and therapeutic services and structural changes to platform design and advertising models. Opponents asked for more technical detail and for scoping that avoids burdening small businesses or undermining constitutional protections.

Assemblymember Bauer‑Kahan, Assemblymember Wicks, Assemblymember Lowenthal and others said they will continue to negotiate language and amendments ahead of later committee hearings.