Representative Tisdell presented House Bill 4388 as a protection for minors who cannot legally consent to contracts, arguing the bill would give parents authority to manage their children's online accounts and delay early exposure to social media. He said the measure requires third‑party age verification so parents must create accounts for minors and can access children’s accounts and messages.

Supporters framed the bill as parental‑empowerment and child safety. Representative Tisdell cited international examples and presented data linking early smartphone and social‑media exposure to long‑term mental‑health risks for youth.

Several industry and civil‑liberties witnesses testified in respectful opposition. Megan Stokes (Computer and Communications Industry Association) told the committee similar laws have raised First Amendment problems in courts, warned of unreliable age‑verification technologies and flagged privacy and biometric data risks. "Courts have consistently prohibited similar laws requiring age verification and parental consent," Stokes said.

Caden Rosenbaum (Reason Foundation) argued HB 4388 mirrors model laws that were abandoned or enjoined in other states and urged lawmakers to pursue narrower, court‑tested alternatives to avoid litigation costs. Amy Boss (NetChoice) likewise argued the bill invites litigation and would create a centralized collection of sensitive identity data that could become a breach target.

Committee members asked constitutional and practical questions; proponents urged parental authority while opponents urged caution. The chair read several submitted record cards (both supporting and opposing positions) and adjourned without a final vote recorded on HB 4388 during the session.