Subcommittee sends "Shazam" social-media bill to full committee after cleanup amendment; sponsor and backers emphasize age-estimation and parental controls

The subcommittee gave House Bill H4591, nicknamed "Shazam," a favorable report as amended and sent it to the full judiciary committee after adopting a cleanup amendment that clarifies language and enforcement.

Representative Brandon Guffey, the primary sponsor, said the bill aims to protect minors by requiring large platforms to estimate account-holder age using data already collected in ordinary business operations, default child accounts to the highest privacy settings, require verifiable parental consent for child accounts, give parents tools to limit usage, and prohibit certain "addictive interface features" and profile-based, child-directed commercial advertising for users age 15 or younger. "This will restore parental authority for the families that choose access," Guffey said.

Why it matters: Supporters framed the bill as content-neutral and designed to reduce algorithmically tailored, attention-maximizing feeds for children while preserving minors' ability to follow accounts they choose when parents consent. The bill would also create a private right of action with a statute of limitations of three years and a statutory damages floor (the sponsor cited $10,000 as an example of statutory damages), and it exposes willful or reckless violations to the state's Attorney General as an unfair trade practice.

Testimony and debate: Roger Brooks of Alliance Defending Freedom, who testified in support, argued the bill differs from other state efforts previously enjoined by courts because it focuses on interface features and requires platforms to use age-estimation technology rather than identity verification. "Shazam is different. It protects children while respecting free speech," Brooks said. Counsel and committee members discussed legal risks and precedents: Brooks acknowledged that courts have split on whether features such as "metrics of likes" are protected speech, and he said those questions may ultimately be addressed by higher courts.

Representative Ryan McCabe pressed on constitutional mechanics and the bill efinition of "addictive features," asking how the bill would avoid limiting protected expression or creating a precedent for broader regulation of speech metrics. Brooks and the sponsor stressed the bill's content-neutral framing and that it restricts the use of individualized behavioral data to tailor feeds rather than blocking specific content.

Cleanup amendment and enforcement: The committee adopted a cleanup amendment that (1) changed the phrase "addictive features" to "addictive interface features," (2) clarified that platforms taking reasonable efforts to comply are not automatically personally liable to a child or parent, and (3) folded enforcement into the state's Unfair Trade Practices Act, consolidating enforcement authority with the Attorney General.

Committee action: A roll call recorded Representatives Moore, Govan and Wickenheimer voting "aye" and one member recorded as not voting; the clerk announced "3 in favor, 2 not voting, 0 against." H4591 was reported favorably as amended to the full judiciary committee.

What happens next: The bill will be considered in the judiciary committee with further constitutional and enforcement questions likely to be the focus of subsequent hearings.

Ending: Committee members encouraged additional stakeholder input as H4591 moves to the next stage.