Since 2022, many U.S. states have passed laws requiring age verification for parts of the internet primarily including social media, social networks, and operating systems with the intention to limit young people's access to content deemed problematic such as pornography and to reduce the negative impact of social media on the mental health and well-being of children and adolescents. The purpose and effects of such laws are highly contested, and some states' laws have been overturned by the judicial system. The only four exceptions to this are Florida, Mississippi, Ohio, Tennessee and Texas.TN Gov. Lee signs 'Protecting Children from Social Media Act' | wbir.com

Critics say that these laws suppress free speech by removing online anonymity. They have also stated the laws undermine safety, especially for children, by increasing the exposure of user data to breaches. Many sites require government IDs and biometric data (such as photographs), often transmitted or stored insecurely and without encryption. They also note that the measures are easily circumvented with VPNs, prompting some states such as Michigan and Wisconsin to propose legislation banning VPNs.

The law in Tennessee took effect after a Federal Judge denied a request to block the law in June 2025, and Mississippi's law HB 1126 was originally blocked from taking effect; however, in July 2025, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals stayed the order blocking the law; this then led to the ones challenging the law, NetChoice, to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to block the law again which it denied in August 2025. What has resulted from this is that Nextdoor has banned anyone under 18 from making an account on their service in Tennessee, and Bluesky has blocked Mississippi users entirely. California, Colorado, and Illinois require a device's operating system to verify one's age.

So far, over 19 states have passed similar laws and over 32 have introduced them, the only states that have not introduced nor passed one are North Dakota and Delaware. So far, seven states have rejected bills that propose age verification for social media them being Hawaii, Montana, Maine, New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Washington, and Wyoming. Two states, Colorado and Vermont, had formally rejected social media age verification bills firstly, but then later passed them.

Background Many state legislatures have considered or enacted legislation pertaining to young people and social media.

In 2022, California passed the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (AB 2273) requiring websites that are likely to be used by minors to estimate visitors' ages.

On March 23, 2023, Utah Governor Spencer Cox signed SB 152 and HB 311, collectively known as the Utah Social Media Regulation Act, which requires age verification; if a user is under 18, they must have parental consent before making an account on any social media platform.

On March 26, 2024, The Anxious Generation was published by Jonathan Haidt. This book is the inspiration for many age verification laws in not only the United States, but also in many other countries.

Laws in effect

Only a fraction of the passed laws have gone into effect, partially due to court challenges.Multiple sources:

SB396 Bill Information - Arkansas State Legislature

Midwestern United States

Illinois

Children's Social Media Safety Act (HB5511) On July 31, 2026, Governor of Illinois JB Pritzker signed HB5511, which is also known as the Children's Social Media Safety Act into law, which requires age verification for children under 18 to use social media and restricts notifications from 10:00pm to 7:00am. The law also requires age verification for operating systems in similar style to California and is enforced by the Attorney General of Illinois and can fine platforms that do not comply up to $50,000 for each violation. It takes effect on January 1, 2028.

Parental Consent for Social Media Act (SB 3440) On February 8, 2024, Willie Preston introduced SB 3440, the Parental Consent for Social Media Act. The bill would have required social media companies who make more than $100 million per year to:

perform reasonable age verification by a third party either by a government-issued identification or any commercially reasonable age verification method, obtain parental consent for minor accounts, enforce a curfew of for minors between 10 pm to 6 am Central Standard Time.

It excludes email, direct messaging, streaming services, online shopping or e-commerce, cloud storage, visualization platforms, libraries, or hubs, providing or obtaining technical support for a social media company's platform, products, or services, academic or scholarly research or providing professional news, sports, entertainment, or other content. The bill permits comments on a digital news website, as long as content is posted only by the provider.

The bill had its first reading and was referred to Assignments.

Minor User of Social Media Protection Act (SB 3510) On February 9, Laura Fine introduced SB 3510, the Minor User of Social Media Protection Act. The bill requires social media platforms with sales greater than $100 million per year to:

verify the age of users and if that user is under 13 (a child), obtain parental consent, not use the information of children for targeted advertising enforce a curfew for children between 10 pm - 6 am Central Standard Time.

The bill differs from SB 3440 in that it applies a lower age limit. The bill had its first reading, but did not pass.

Indiana

HB 1408 On March 4, 2026, the governor of Indiana, Mike Braun, signed HB 1408. One of the requirements of the law is that social media platforms that have at least 10 percent of their audience that is younger than 16 spend an average of 2 hours per day and have certain features that Indiana finds addictive to require parental consent for users under 16 and have the ability of parents to have some level of control over the account and disable some addictive features for accounts under 16.HB1408.04.ENRS.pdf| Indiana General Assembly

The law is similar to Florida's social media restrictions with some differences them being that it only applies to platforms that make more than 1 billion dollars and does not outright ban users under a certain age. Indiana previously, in the same session, had a bill known as Indiana SB 199 which would have banned minors under 14 from covered platforms and its restriction would have applied to those under 18 not under 16 but that section of the bill was removed by the sponsor of the bill Jeff Raatz for unknown reasons. HB 1408 social media provisions were added to the bill by a vote of 93–0 by the Indiana House and a vote of 49–1 by the Indiana Senate. It take effect on January 1, 2027.HB1408.400_H.pdf| Indiana General AssemblyHB1408.311_S.pdf| Indiana General AssemblySB0199.01.INTR.pdf| Indiana General Assembly

HB 1314 On January 10, 2024, Johanna King introduced HB 1314 to the House. The bill requires social media services to:

verify user ages via a reasonable method, require parental consent for minors after 14 days, not recommend content to minors' accounts or disseminate advertising to them. enforce a curfew for minors from 10:30 pm – 6:30 am Eastern Standard Time. prevent minors from changing or configuring an account. allow a parent to view all account activity, configure the account, and limit the number of daily usage hours.

The bill would be enforced by a private right of action and by the state. The bill died in committee.

SB 11 On January 8, 2025, Mike Bohacek introduced SB 11. The bill requires social media operators to:

identify all users, obtain parental consent for users who are under 16 and notify the parent that consent can be revoked, secure and encrypt data collected parental consent.

Each violation would have faced a fine of up to $250,000, plus the cost of the investigation following a 90-day period were the defendant could cure the violation. It would have taken effect on July 1, 2025.

On January 15, the bill passed out of Indiana's Judiciary Committee by a vote of 10–1. The bill passed the Indiana Senate by a vote of 42–7 on January 23.

Minnesota

Stop Harms from Addictive Social Media Act (HF 4138) On May 26, 2026, Governor of Minnesota Tim Walz signed HF 4138 into law, also known as the Stop Harms from Addictive Social Media Act, it requires social media platforms that have more than a billion dollars within at least one of the last three years to estimate the age of accounts and if the estimated age is considered to have an 80 percent or higher chance of being under 16. The platform must first obtain parental consent and not allow an addictive interface meaning they cannot give a minor under 16 infinite scrolling, a profile based feed, autoplay, the display of person metrics on videos, or the display of rewards regardless of parental consent. The law is enforced through private lawsuits from affected parents and minors, as well as the Attorney General of Minnesota as violating the law is considered a deceptive trade practice under section 325D.44 of Minnesota Statutes and Section 8.31 of Minnesota Statutes gives the Attorney General of Minnesota. It takes effect on July 1, 2027.

HF 3724 On February 24, 2022, HF 3724 was introduced to the House.

It would require social media platforms with at least 1 million users to:

avoid using algorithmic recommendation systems to present content to any minor, save for government or school-created content, except to block access to inappropriate or harmful content, or comply with parental controls that filter content for age-appropriate materials.

The bill made it through its first and second reading in the House. Enforcement would be by the state of country.

Ohio

Social Media Parental Notification Act (HB 31) On July 4, 2023, Ohio enacted HB 33. One part of that bill was the Social Media Parental Notification Act, which requires online gaming and social media platforms that are likely to be used by under 16s and requires such users to obtain parental consent before they can make a contract on a social media or online gaming platform. The law took effect on January 15, 2024.HB 33 Text Section Section.1349.09. Governor Mike DeWine and Lieutenant Governor Jon Husted both advocated for the law to be added in the 2024-2025 bill.

On January 5, 2024, NetChoice sued in the Southern District Court of Ohio claiming the law was unconstitutionally vague and was in violation of the First Amendment and Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment. On January 9, Chief Judge Algenon L. Marbley granted a temporary restraining order, temporarily blocking the law. On January 19 Husted filed a brief in opposition to a preliminary injunction, claiming that the law protects minors' mental health and privacy and protecting them from predators and that Ohio had a compelling interest in the law. On January 26, NetChoice filed another brief. The Attorney General then submitted a reply brief.

On February 7 2024, a hearing on NetChoice's motion was held. On February 12, Chief Judge Algenon L. Marbley granted NetChoice's motion.

On April 16, 2025, the law was declared unconstitutional in its entirety and was permanently blocked by Judge Algenon L. Marbley after he previously granted a Temporary Restraining Order in January 2024 and a Preliminary Injunction in February of the same year. Ohio would then appeal the permanent injunction and a hearing on the appeal was set for February 4, 2026.