Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Social Media Age Verification topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
House debate centers on amended social-media age-verification language amid First Amendment concerns
Summary
Lawmakers debated an amended provision requiring platforms to verify ages and seek parental consent for suspected under-16 accounts; Representative Garcia warned the original measure could face First Amendment challenges, while Representative Martin said the committee amendment addressed those concerns. A voice vote carried the motion to adopt related committee reports.
Members of the House of Representatives debated an amended social-media age-verification measure during floor consideration of standing committee reports, with constitutional concerns aired but the measure advancing by voice vote.
Representative Scott Garcia spoke in opposition, invoking the Attorney General's committee testimony and warning that the original formulation ‘‘may be subject to legal challenge under the First Amendment of the US Constitution’’ because it would ‘‘broadly seek to prohibit all minors under the age of 16 from having a social media account or profile with no exceptions.’’ He also cited international experience in Australia and cautioned about unintended harms if access is broadly restricted.
Representative Linda Martin responded by clarifying the version before the House had been amended in committee. "What we're voting on today has been amended in committee," she said, adding that the measure as presented would require platforms to verify the age of new account registrants and, for existing accounts when the platform has reason to believe the registrant is under 16, require parental consent. "That is all," she said, noting that the amendment removed the broader prohibition Garcia described.
Other members registered reservations (Representatives Amato, Shimizu and Cochran), while Representative Belatti argued the change was a reasonable step to protect youth from manipulative design practices by large platforms. Representative Souza entered Belatti’s remarks into the record as her own.
The chamber took a voice vote on the motion to adopt the listed standing committee reports (which included the amended language); the presiding officer announced the motion carried. The transcript does not record a roll-call tally or a named recorded vote.
Next steps: the motion directed that the accompanying Senate bills, as amended, pass second reading and be referred to their designated committees; members were reminded of triple-referral filing deadlines later that day.
