On Wednesday, August 6th, 2026, the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee advanced five bills focused on online safety and artificial intelligence (AI), including the Shielding Children's Retinas from Egregious Exposure on the Net (SCREEN) Act and the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA).

The SCREEN Act, introduced by Senator Mike Lee (R–Utah), seeks to require pornography websites to block minors through strict age verification measures. The bill asserts that "shielding minors from access to online pornographic content is a compelling government interest" and claims its provisions are the "least restrictive means for Congress" to achieve this goal. However, the bill mandates that companies verify IP addresses in addition to simple age attestation, such as entering a birthday. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) warned that such verification would "force millions of adult internet users to give up their anonymity, privacy, and security before they access lawful speech." Despite these concerns, the SCREEN Act received majority support in the committee but did not advance due to a lack of quorum.

KOSA, under consideration by Congress since 2022, requires "covered online platforms" like social media and video streaming services to implement safeguards protecting users under 17. The committee also advanced legislation requiring users under 18 to obtain parental consent before using chatbots, along with a bill mandating AI companies to implement critical privacy protections on chatbots.

Additionally, Representative Ruben Gallego (D–Ariz.) introduced the Parental Approval for Youth Social Media Act. This bill would require social media platforms to obtain parental consent for children creating or maintaining accounts and to verify users' ages and parental authorization before allowing minors access. Gallego cited France's ban on social media use for children under 15 as inspiration for the proposal.

Free speech advocates have expressed concern that these bills could threaten online privacy and freedom by imposing duties on platforms to protect users from subjective reactions to constitutionally protected speech, a standard courts have historically rejected on First Amendment grounds.

Sources