California legislators are advancing a contentious proposal aimed at prohibiting children under the age of 16 from using TikTok, Instagram, and similar social media platforms—despite increasing opposition from critics.
The bipartisan legislation, known as AB-1709, recently sailed through committee approval with substantial backing, bringing the state closer to implementing a significant change that could drastically alter how teenagers interact online.
This initiative would essentially ban minors under 16 from accessing platforms laden with features deemed “addictive,” such as infinite scrolling, autoplay videos, and persistent notifications, unless these companies significantly modify their applications.
Proponents of the bill argue that it is a necessary step that is long overdue.
Assemblyman Josh Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), the bill’s sponsor, has expressed concern that social media companies currently have “unrestricted access to vulnerable, developing minds” and have deliberately made design choices that negatively affect users’ neurological systems, potentially leading to addiction, depression, and even death in severe cases.
He believes the legislation is essential to address what he describes as an “emerging public health crisis” fueled by the influence of major technology companies.
If passed, companies would be forced to verify users’ ages and delete accounts belonging to kids under 16 — or face penalties.
The bill has already cleared two committees in a matter of days and is on track for a full Assembly vote next month. Gov. Gavin Newsom has signaled support, and Lowenthal is betting bipartisan momentum will carry it into law by summer.
The push comes as eye-popping stats show just how glued teens are to their screens. Surveys from Pew Research Center found most teens are on YouTube and TikTok daily, with huge numbers also hooked on Instagram and Snapchat — and up to 16% admit they’re online “almost constantly.”
Even some teens say it’s a problem.
Still, not everyone is buying Sacramento’s fix.
Opponents — including privacy advocates, tech industry groups and even some Democrats — warn the bill could backfire, trampling free speech and parental rights in the process.
Jaime Huff, head of the Civil Justice Association of California, blasted the plan as unconstitutional overreach.
“Protecting kids online is important, but banning minors from broad swaths of the internet is not the answer,” she said, arguing the proposal “substitutes a blunt government mandate for the protections families actually need,” like parental controls.
Critics say the measure would strip families of the ability to decide what’s best for their own kids, replacing it with a one-size-fits-all government rule.
Common Sense Media CEO Jim Steyer insists the bill doesn’t censor kids — it targets the tech itself.
“This bill prohibits platforms that use addictive feeds from allowing children under 16 to hold accounts,” he said. “We are regulating how these multi-billion-dollar platforms can target them through predatory product design.”
Steyer framed the fight as David vs. Goliath — parents versus tech titans armed with armies of engineers fine-tuning apps to keep kids hooked.
“No parent can compete,” he said.
California wouldn’t be the first to try. Florida has already passed a similar law for younger teens — though it’s now tied up in court.
Social media platforms removed 4.7 million accounts after Australia banned them for children younger than 16 at the end of last year.
