Panel split over bill requiring social platforms to display users’ state; advocates and tech groups urge caution

Senator Kevin M. Harris told the committee that SB932 would require platforms to display a user’s general geographic origin (state and country) for adult accounts to help users evaluate whether content originates from foreign actors or coordinated bad actors. "In the age of social media...international actors are looking to profit from user engagement at the expense of public trust and democratic stability," he said.

Committee members raised technical and safety questions. One lawmaker asked whether a simpler U.S.‑versus‑non‑U.S. flag would accomplish the goal; the sponsor said that would be acceptable as a first step. Lawmakers also asked what the bill would mean for users who turn off location services; the sponsor said platforms already can infer location from IP addresses and had previously displayed city/state information before pulling back.

Opponents included the Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence, the Maryland Coalition Against Sexual Assault, the Maryland State's Attorneys Association and major tech trade groups. Laurie Ruth of the Maryland Network Against Domestic Violence said survivors could be endangered because abusers who know victims’ networks can exploit displayed location cues. "Persistent abusers know their victims...they're going to learn about this location device and use it to their advantage," she told the committee.

Joyce King, deputy state's attorney and co‑chair of a special victims subcommittee, said most online offenders are domestic and can use VPNs and proxies to mask location, creating a false sense of security for consumers. Tech trade witnesses (TechNet, CCIA, ITI) warned IP‑based geolocation is often inaccurate, can be manipulated by VPNs, and that mandatory display would force platforms either to collect precise geolocation (raising privacy conflicts) or face liability for unreliable signals.

Witnesses from business and consumer groups proposed alternatives and amendments: several suggested a U.S.‑versus‑non‑U.S. indicator or stronger protections for survivors and a registry exemption. The sponsor acknowledged some amendments were added on the Senate floor to address domestic‑violence concerns and said he would consider working with committee members on fixes. The hearing record shows robust opposition and technical questions; the transcript does not show a committee vote.