House Commerce Advances Privacy Bills Despite Pallone Objections

The House Commerce Committee will now consider the American Privacy Rights Act (APRA) and the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) (HR-7891) at a full committee markup after the subcommittee passed both by voice vote.

Pallone objected to KOSA’s duty-of-care provision and said he’s “actively reviewing” the modified bill language to determine if “my overarching policy goals have been met.” He said the only way of properly addressing social media harms to children is by modernizing Communications Decency Act Section 230. Pallone and Chair Cathy McMorris Rodgers, R-Wash., filed a discussion draft proposal that would sunset Section 230 in 2025 (see 2405220059).

Despite his objections, Pallone said, he won’t block KOSA advancing. The duty-of-care provision could result in platforms “over-filtering” content and blocking children from accessing “helpful” and sometimes “life-saving” content, he said: “No one thinks that social media companies are acting in the best interests of their users, and we should not trust them to do so in the future. I believe the companies operating these platforms know that the use of their platforms is causing harm,” particularly to children.

KOSA was introduced by Reps. Kathy Castor, D-Fla., and Tim Walberg, R-Mich., and Sens. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., and Marsha Blackburn, R-Tenn. Castor and Walberg spoke critically of APRA, the comprehensive draft privacy bill from Pallone and Rodgers. Castor and Walberg introduced the Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA 2.0), a bill Sens. Ed Markey, D-Mass., and Bill Cassidy, R-La., unveiled first in the upper chamber. Pallone and Rodgers incorporated COPPA 2.0 language into APRA. The provisions they included aren’t strong enough, Castor and Walberg said.

Castor said she’s “so very disappointed” with how “ineffective and weak” the APRA draft is on protecting children. She objected to the removal of COPPA 2.0’s knowledge standard and its “weak definition” for targeted advertising that she said would allow websites and apps to easily skirt new requirements. As written, APRA “fails children and teens,” she said. Walberg said COPPA 2.0 provides long-negotiated, robust protections for children that APRA lacks. He spoke against APRA’s elimination of a provision that would extend protections to users 16 and younger. The existing COPPA framework applies to users younger than 13.

Rodgers said the committee has “intentionally” kept the bills as discussion drafts so members can continue working through language before a full committee markup.

Tech groups issued statements of opposition to various bills and provisions. Computer & Communications Industry Association CEO Matt Schruers said KOSA and COPPA 2.0 will “result in over-removal of legitimate free expression, including by marginalized communities. Parents, not regulators, are best empowered to determine what content is appropriate for their children online.” He urged further discussion before the full committee holds a markup.

APRA and KOSA would leave “Americans with a false sense of safety and security if passed,” NetChoice said in a statement. The organization opposes APRA language that would allow carve-outs for state-specific laws, preventing the bill from setting a true national privacy standard. The bill’s private right of action “could overwhelm the system with legal actions that do little to protect consumer privacy but create significant burdens for businesses,” NetChoice said.

The Consumer Technology Association urged the committee to “resist harming innovation.” A federal privacy law should be clear about preempting state laws and protecting companies from “frivolous litigation,” said CEO Gary Shapiro in a statement.

NAB said Thursday it looks forward to working with the committee as APRA advances. Subcommittee passage “marks a significant step forward in providing essential legal clarity for America’s broadcasters amidst a landscape of varied state laws governing online engagement,” NAB CEO Curtis LeGeyt said.

Fight for the Future led a coalition of LGBTQ and reproductive rights groups opposing KOSA. They cited the potential for platforms to over-censor and remove “vital” information for communities such as trans youth and abortion seekers. The organization highlighted Pallone’s remarks after the hearing: “If one of the most senior Democrats in the House is fundamentally opposed to the duty of care as a model, it’s hard to see how this controversial bill could advance any further.” Fight for Our Future noted continued opposition from Rep. Maxwell Frost, D-Fla., and Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore.