By Molly Buckley and Maddie Daly<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the name of ‘protecting kids online,’ Congress pushed forward legislation this year that could have severely undermined our privacy and stifled free speech. These bills would have mandated invasive age-verification checks for everyone online\u2014adults and kids alike\u2014handing unprecedented control to tech companies and government authorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Lawmakers from both sides of the aisle introduced bill after bill, each one somehow more problematic than the last, and each one a gateway for massive surveillance, internet censorship, and government overreach. In all, Congress considered nearly twenty federal proposals.<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n For us, this meant a year of playing legislative whack-a-mole, fighting off one bad bill after another. But more importantly, it meant building sustained opposition, strengthening coalitions, and empowering our supporters\u2014that’s you!<\/em>\u2014with the tools you need<\/a> to understand what’s at stake and take action<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Luckily, thanks to this strong opposition, these federal efforts all stalled\u2026 for now.<\/p>\n\n\n\n So, before we hang our hats and prepare for the new year, let\u2019s review some of our major wins against federal age-verification legislation in 2025.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Of the dozens of federal proposals relating to kids online, the Kids Online Safety Act remains the biggest threat. We, along with a coalition of civil liberties groups, LGBTQ+ advocates, youth organizations, human rights advocates, and privacy experts, have been sounding the alarm on KOSA for<\/a> years<\/a> now<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n First introduced in 2022, KOSA would allow the Federal Trade Commission to sue apps and websites that don\u2019t take measures to restrict young people\u2019s access to certain content. There have been numerous versions introduced, though all of them share a common core: KOSA is an unconstitutional censorship bill<\/a> that threatens the speech and privacy rights of all internet users. It would impose a requirement that platforms \u201cexercise reasonable care\u201d to prevent and mitigate a sweeping list of harms to minors, including depression, anxiety, eating disorders, substance use, bullying, and \u201ccompulsive usage.\u201d Those prohibitions are so broad that they will sweep up online speech about the topics, including efforts to provide resources to adults and minors experiencing them. The bill claims prohibit censorship based on \u201cthe viewpoint of users,\u201d but that\u2019s simply a smokescreen<\/a>. Its core function is to let the federal government sue platforms, big or small, that don\u2019t block or restrict content that someone later claims contributed to one of these harms. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In addition to stifling online speech, KOSA would strongly incentivize age-verification systems\u2014forcing all users, adults and minors, to prove who they are before they can speak or read online. Because KOSA requires online services to separate and censor aspects of their services accessed by children, services are highly likely to demand to know every user\u2019s age to avoid showing minors any of the content KOSA deems harmful. There are a variety of age determination options<\/a>, but all have serious privacy, accuracy, or security problems<\/a>. Even worse, age-verification schemes lead everyone to provide even more personal data<\/a> to the very online services that have invaded our privacy before. And all age verification systems, at their core, burden the rights of adults<\/a> to read, get information, and speak and browse online anonymously.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Despite what lawmakers claim, KOSA won\u2019t bother big tech<\/a>\u2014in fact, they endorse it! The bill is written so that big tech companies, like Apple and X, will be able to handle the regulatory burden that KOSA will demand, while smaller platforms will struggle to comply. Under KOSA, a small platform hosting mental health discussion boards will be just as vulnerable as Meta or TikTok\u2014but much less able to defend itself. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The good news<\/em> is that KOSA\u2019s momentum this Congress was waning at best. There was a lot of talk about the bill from lawmakers, but little action. The Senate version of the bill<\/a>, which passed overwhelmingly last summer, did not even make it out of committee this Congress.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the House, lawmakers could not get on the same page about the bill\u2014so much so that one of the original sponsors of KOSA actually voted against the bill<\/a> in committee in December.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The bad news<\/em> is that lawmakers are determined to keep raising this issue, as soon as the beginning of next year. So let\u2019s keep the momentum going<\/a> by showing them that users do not want age verification mandates\u2014we want privacy.<\/p>\n\n\n\n KOSA wasn\u2019t the only federal bill in 2025 that used \u201ckids\u2019 safety\u201d as a cover for sweeping surveillance and censorship mandates. Concern about possible harms of AI chatbots dominated policy discussion this year in Congress.<\/p>\n\n\n\n One of the most alarming proposals on the issue was the GUARD Act, which would require AI chatbots to verify all users\u2019 ages, prohibit minors from using AI tools, and implement steep criminal penalties for chatbots that promote or solicit certain harms. As we wrote in November<\/a>, though the GUARD Act may look<\/em> like a child-safety bill, in practice it\u2019s an age-gating mandate that could be imposed on nearly every public-facing AI chatbot\u2014from customer-service bots to search-engine assistants. The GUARD Act could force countless AI companies to collect sensitive identity data, chill online speech, and block teens from using some of the digital tools that they rely on every day.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Like KOSA, the GUARD Act would make the internet less free, less private, and less safe for everyone. It would further consolidate power and resources in the hands of the bigger AI companies, crush smaller developers, and chill innovation under the threat of massive fines. And it would cut off vulnerable groups\u2019 ability to use helpful everyday AI tools, further fracturing the internet we know and love.<\/p>\n\n\n\n With your help, we urged lawmakers to reject the GUARD Act<\/a> and focus instead on policies that provide more transparency, options, and comprehensive privacy for all<\/a> users.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Together, these bills reveal a troubling pattern in Congress this year. Rather than actually protecting young people\u2019s privacy and safety online, Congress continues to push a legislative framework that\u2019s based on some deeply flawed<\/em> assumptions:<\/p>\n\n\n\n We\u2019ve written over<\/a> and over<\/a> about the many communities<\/a> who are immeasurably harmed by online age verification mandates. It is also worth remembering who these bills serve<\/em><\/a>\u2014big tech companies, private age verification vendors, AI companies, and legislators vying for the credit of \u201csolving\u201d online safety while undermining users at every turn.<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n![\"Bullhorn](\"https:\/\/www.eff.org\/files\/banner_library\/yearinreview_1200x600px_banner_2025.jpg\")
<\/figure>\n\n\n\nThe Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA)<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Threats Beyond KOSA<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
Beating Age Verification for Good<\/strong><\/h3>\n\n\n\n
\n