Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Social Media Children Eating Disorders topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill limiting social-media features tied to eating disorders after mixed testimony
Summary
AB4664 would prohibit social platforms from promoting practices or features that may exacerbate eating disorders among underage users. A registered dietitian and other advocates testified in favor; NJBIA opposed, citing vague liability standards. The committee released the bill to second reference after debate and one recorded no vote.
The Assembly Science, Innovation and Technology Committee voted to send Assembly Bill 4664 to a second reference after hearing competing testimony about whether the measure’s public-health goals outweigh legal and enforcement concerns.
April Malevski, a registered dietitian who works in long-term care and runs a private nutrition practice, testified in favor and said clinicians see social media worsen body dissatisfaction and disordered eating among young patients. "This bill aims to restrict such advertising, protecting teenagers from misleading and damaging messages as they navigate online spaces," she told the committee and noted support from Miss New Jersey 2024, Elizabeth Mendel, whose 'Images Everywhere' initiative focuses on eating-disorder awareness.
Kyle Sullender, speaking for the New Jersey Business & Industry Association, said the intent is laudable but the bill as written raises legal and practical problems. Sullender highlighted ambiguity about the civil-liability threshold — the bill references potential for harm rather than requiring proof of harm — and asked how an exemption for user-generated content would interact with design- and algorithm-focused provisions. He said NJBIA had reached out to the sponsor to seek clarifications and amendments.
Assemblyman Phillips said he would vote no because he lacked basic information about which state agency would enforce the law, the standards for penalties (he cited a reported maximum penalty of $250,000 per violation), and whether the bill would enable private lawsuits. Other members, including Assemblyman Miller and Assemblywoman Simmons, said they would vote to release the bill with the expectation that ambiguities would be addressed in future amendments. Recorded roll-call results show the committee released the bill to second reference with one recorded 'no' vote and multiple 'yes' votes.
The committee chair encouraged continued sponsor outreach and amendment work; the next steps will be determined as the sponsor and staff reconcile liability standards, enforcement authority and the user-generated-content exemption.
