CA bill could force social media to ban children’s accounts

By Samuel Chapman, especially for CalMatters

This comment was originally posted by CalMatters. Sign up for their newsletters.

Guest Comment written by

The last time I saw my son alive, I didn’t feel anything out of the ordinary.

There was no warning, no flashing signals that something was wrong. Like so many parents, I believed the biggest risks to my child were the ones I could see—driving, drugs on the street, and strangers in the physical world. I did what parents are taught to do: I stayed involved, asked questions, and set boundaries.

But the danger that threatened my son did not come from the outside world, I understood. it came via appa system designed to connect instantly, privately and frictionlessly, a system I could neither see nor control.

Via Snapchat, a drug dealer contacted Sammy and delivered a fake drug to our home, like a pizza, after we fell asleep. It contained a lethal dose of fentanyl.

Every day in California, families face a dangerous reality. Social media platforms put powerful, fast, and often anonymous communication tools directly into the hands of young teens.

While these tools can be used to connect, they can also expose children to risks, they are not developmentally ready for navigation.

Lawmakers are considering a bill that would ban children under 16 from creating or maintaining accounts on social media platforms with addictive features. Assembly Bill 1709assembly author Josh Lowenthalit will require platforms, not parents, to enforce this rule.

AB 1709 is a measured step, not a radical one. It reflects what many parents have come to realize: the current system isn’t working.

It does not disconnect children from the Internet. Does not block access to information. It simply postpones participation in highly personalized, addictive, account-based social media ecosystems until age 16.

California already recognizes that some products require precautions. We regulate driving, alcohol, gambling and firearms because we understand that certain risks require clear boundaries for developing minds.

Social media already falls into this category.

Families have been told for years that the harms of social media can be managed through better settings, smarter algorithms or increased parental vigilance. But social platforms built around private messaging, algorithmic amplification, and quick connections with strangers routinely bypass these defenses.

Parents cannot control the systems that are designed to limit surveillance. These platforms are optimized for engagement – keeping young users online as long as possible – not for safety.

For too long, parents have relied on promises from tech companies that didn’t deliver. Evidence of harm to young users—in terms of mental health, exposure to dangerous content, and vulnerability to exploitation—is no longer theoretical.

The US Surgeon General reported that young spending more than three hours a day on social media face approximately twice the risk of depression and anxiety symptoms.

A study followed 1,200 children for a decade and found that two or more hours of social media use per day was associated with increased depressive symptoms and poorer well-being a year later. A 2024 analysis of 45 studies involving 153,000 adolescents found statistically significant links between social media use and depressionanxiety, loneliness and low self-esteem.

AB 1709 is about prevention. It does not criminalize teenagers or fine their parents. It puts the onus where it belongs: on the companies that design and profit from these platforms.

The bill also recognizes that technology is evolving. It includes oversight mechanisms to ensure that the law can adapt as platforms change, which has been lacking in previous efforts to tackle online harm.

California has often led the nation in consumer protection and child safety. AB 1709 is an opportunity to lead again, not by limiting innovation, but by recognizing that some limits are necessary.

The welfare of children should not depend on whether companies choose to act. It should be built into the rules we set. AB 1709 finally draws that line.

This article was originally published on CalMatters and is republished under Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-No Derivatives license.