A bipartisan group of lawmakers is advancing a new theory for regulating social media platforms, arguing that companies such as Meta and YouTube should be treated less like publishers and more like pharmaceutical firms whose products can cause harm to children and teenagers.
The emerging approach, described in a recent NOTUS report, reflects growing frustration on Capitol Hill over the inability of Congress and state governments to impose meaningful restrictions on social media companies despite years of hearings, lawsuits and public criticism. Lawmakers backing the effort say recent court verdicts and mounting public concern over the mental health effects of social media have created a new opening for legislation focused on youth safety.
A jury in New Mexico recently found Meta responsible for misleading users about the dangers of its platforms, while a California jury found Meta and YouTube liable for failing to adequately protect users, especially minors, from adverse mental health effects. The NOTUS report also cited polling showing broad public support for stronger restrictions on social media use by children.
The proposals now circulating in Congress focus heavily on age verification and limits on platform features considered addictive or harmful to minors. Among them is the GUARD Act, sponsored by Sens. Josh Hawley (R-MO) and Katie Britt (R-AL) along with Democratic senators, which would impose age-verification requirements on AI chatbots. The legislation recently advanced unanimously out of the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Another proposal from the House Kids Online Safety Caucus would establish a broader legal framework for age verification online. Separately, a Senate bill backed by roughly three-quarters of members would require platforms to limit algorithmic recommendations and certain market research practices for users under 17.
Supporters of the legislation say the issue has created unusual alliances across party lines.
“I just think that what these verdicts show is that normal people who are going about their lives, when they get presented with the facts of what these companies are doing, they’re saying, ‘We cannot allow this to go on,’” Hawley told NOTUS. He added that Congress should “actually do something for a change.”
Sen. Chris Murphy of Connecticut, a Democrat backing the legislation, said the issue transcends traditional ideological divisions. “It’s not a right or left issue,” Murphy said, adding that he and Republican supporters are united by concerns about protecting children online.
Read more: UK Steps Up Pressure on Social Media Platforms Over Children’s Online Safety
The most notable shift, however, may be the regulatory framework some lawmakers are now embracing. Rep. Jake Auchincloss, a Massachusetts Democrat leading House efforts on the issue, argued that previous attempts to regulate online speech directly have repeatedly failed in court because of First Amendment concerns. States including Utah, Ohio and California have seen courts block or limit youth social media laws on constitutional grounds.
Instead, lawmakers are increasingly framing social media addiction as a public health problem akin to addiction to drugs or tobacco products.
“The framing of this, of social media, is starting to change from a publisher of things that people say to a pharmaceutical intervention that really is about the manipulation of your ventral striatum and the distribution of dopamine in your brain,” Auchincloss told NOTUS.
Auchincloss said that reframing has helped attract support from conservative family advocacy groups that might otherwise disagree with Democrats on broader cultural issues. “We are going to align on social media as a temperance movement,” he said.
Rep. Erin Houchin, an Indiana Republican and co-chair of the Kids Online Safety Caucus, said lawmakers are increasingly converging around the idea of raising the effective “age of adulthood” online from 13 to 16.
Despite the growing bipartisan consensus, lawmakers and advocacy groups cited the tech industry’s lobbying power as the biggest obstacle to passing legislation. According to an analysis referenced in the report, technology companies spent an average of $226,000 per day on federal lobbying during the first quarter of the year. Advocates also accused major platforms of supporting voluntary safeguards while opposing binding federal rules, per NOTUS.
While no major overhaul of social media regulation appears close to passage, the bipartisan effort suggests Congress may increasingly pursue a health-and-safety framework for tech oversight rather than the content-moderation battles that have dominated Washington for years.
