July 26, 2024
Sen. Richard Blumental (D-CT), a rabid progressive, has introduced S.1409 – Kids Online Safety Act. However, as is often the case with legislation with nice sounding names and noble intentions, it’s far from that.
On the Senate floor, Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) explained why:
“Free minds and parental guidance are the best means to protect our children. Opposition to this bill is bipartisan, with advocates on the left and the right. Pro-life organization Students for Life Action commented on this bill stating, ‘Once again, a piece of federal legislation with broad powers and vague definitions threatens Pro-Life free speech. Those targeted by a weaponized government will always include pro-life Americans defending mothers and their children, born and unborn.’ Students for Life Action concludes their statement by saying “already the Pro-Life Generation faces discrimination, de-platforming, and short-and-long term bans from social media based on the whims of others. Students for Life Action calls for a NO vote on KOSA to prevent viewpoint discrimination from becoming federal policy at the FTC.’”
Sen. Paul also gave us an excellent shout-out in his recent Courier-Journal op-ed.
Here’s what you need to know about the Kids Online Safety Act which Students for Life Action (SFLAction) strongly opposes.
What’s at Stake:
More than ever, children are being exposed to explicit and harmful content. In fact, a recent article from Forbes suggests the number could be as high as 50% of children before age 12 have witnessed inappropriate content. And according to Pew Research Group, more and more parents are concerned about this trend. A recent study showed 46% are extremely or very worried about their teenagers being exposed to explicit content.
What The Legislation Does:
The S.1409 – Kids Online Safety Act states:
- Covered platforms (such as social media sites) must take reasonable measures in the design and operation of products or services used by minors to prevent and mitigate certain harms that may arise from that use (e.g., sexual exploitation and online bullying).
- Additionally, covered platforms must provide (1) minors with certain safeguards, such as settings that restrict access to minors’ personal data; and (2) parents or guardians with tools to supervise minors’ use of a platform, such as control of privacy and account settings.
- Covered platforms must also:
- Disclose specified information, including details regarding the use of personalized recommendation systems and individual-specific advertising to minors.
- Allow parents, guardians, minors, and schools to report certain harms.
- Refrain from facilitating advertising of age-restricted products or services (e.g., tobacco and gambling) to minors.
- Annually report on foreseeable risks of harm to minors from using the platform.
However, this bill’s language could have other terrible consequences. Due to its broad language, First Amendment rights could be jeopardized, especially for pro-life organizations and platforms.
For example, “mental health disorder,” “prevent or mitigate,” and “addiction-like behaviors” in the bill language are not clearly defined, and with a biased federal agency, it has a high likelihood of being weaponized against not only right-leaning groups, but especially pro-life groups due to how polarizing the issue is. If this bill were to pass, anyone who deems pro-life content on social media platforms to cause them “anxiety” or “mental harm” could sue the organization because they do not agree with their ideological preferences.
Overall, this bill empowers the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to execute viewpoint discrimination, violates First Amendment rights, and creates unnecessary lawsuits against pro-life organizations.
What SFLAction Has Done or Said on This Issue:
SFLAction, like far too many pro-life organizations, knows how valuable the First Amendment is, especially when faced with a hostile or weaponized government or justice system.
For the last several years, SFLAction has fought off, or is fighting, numerous challenges to our rights when it comes to advocacy, expression, or even the right to peacefully protest. This has included physical attacks and arson to bomb threats and intimidation. We have also been placed on a terrorist watch list, and seen our students and staff arrested for writing in sidewalk chalk.
SFLAction President Kristan Hawkins’s full statement, which was echoed by Sen. Rand Paul, says: “Once again, a piece of federal legislation with broad powers and vague definitions threatens Pro-Life free speech. The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) states a noble goal of protecting children’s mental health, but we all know that without concrete definitions, those targeted by a weaponized federal government will almost always include Pro-Life Americans, defending mothers and their children – born and preborn. Giving the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) broad powers to decide what constitutes potentially stressful or allegedly harmful messaging will lead to more abuse of discretion. Already the Pro-Life Generation faces discrimination, de-platforming, and short-and-long term bans from social media based on the whims of others. Students for Life Action calls for a NO vote on KOSA to prevent viewpoint discrimination from becoming federal policy at the FTC.”
To learn more about other legislation moving through Congress that SFLAction supports, CLICK HERE.