As Mich. Legislators Mull Age Verification, Tech Industry Alludes to Lawsuits
Opponents of social media age-verification requirements Thursday cast a Michigan bill as outdated, bad for consumer privacy and likely to draw a lawsuit. However, at the Michigan House Regulatory Reform Committee hearing, sponsor Rep. Mark Tisdel (R) repeatedly said his legislation is meant to hammer home a critical concept: “Minors can’t consent.”
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
HB-4388 simply “is about requiring age verification before a minor can sign an online contract,” said Tisdel. The bill would require social media platforms to verify the age of Michigan residents trying to open accounts and, if they are younger than 18, confirm that a parent or guardian has provided consent.
Also, starting 180 days after the bill takes effect, platforms would have to age verify existing accounts and, if needed, obtain parental consent not more than 14 days after the user tries to access the account, according to a summary.
The bill would be enforced by Michigan’s attorney general, with civil fines up to $2,500 per violation possible, though companies would get a 30-day right to cure potential violations. The AG would also have authority under the bill to make regulations, "including rules that provide the processes a social media company must use to verify or confirm age, residency, or consent, and requirements for protecting and handling information obtained through those processes,” the bill summary said. “The methods to establish residency could not be limited to a valid identification card issued by a governmental entity.”
Supporting the bill at the hearing, Rep. Angela Rigas (D) noted that it’s “hard as a parent to deny your child the ability to communicate with their classmates,” but HB-4388 could help parents pay more attention to what their kids are doing.
“This is a tool for parents,” Tisdel agreed. Under social media platforms' business model, "you are a more valuable account the longer you're on their platform. They're collecting more data that they can sell to advertisers. And God love them, they've been very successful. But let's not ... turn our kids' attention into profits.”
However, tech industry opponents depicted the bill as putting consumer data in danger. HB-4388 is a "privacy nightmare,” said Amy Bos, NetChoice vice president of government relations. Collecting sensitive information for verification "creates a honeypot of personal data vulnerable to breaches. Bad actors would love nothing more than a database linking real identities to social media accounts."
Megan Stokes, state policy director for the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), said, “Age-verification technologies are not only unreliable [but] they raise significant privacy risks, especially when they require collection of sensitive data like biometrics or government IDs."Stokes added,“These mandates could deter users, threaten small business viability and, ironically, expose individuals to greater privacy harms.”
NetChoice and CCIA, which sued several other states with age-verification laws, raised the possibility that Michigan could be next. “An unconstitutional law protects no one,” Bos said. “It just guarantees litigation, while kids remain no safer.”
Stokes pointed out that multiple courts ruled that similar laws in other states violate the First Amendment. If it becomes law, HB-4388 also "may unintentionally cause platforms to block all minors rather than risk legal consequences, denying teens access to educational and supportive communities online,” she said. CCIA members are "already addressing these concerns with parental controls, time limits [and] enhanced privacy settings.”
However, Rep. Jamie Thompson (R) said she “strongly” disagreed with Stokes. First Amendment rights "are all fine and good," said Thompson, but lawmakers must also think about "so many parents who are trying their hardest to protect their children."
Meanwhile, Caden Rosenbaum, managing director of tech policy at the Reason Foundation, criticized the Michigan bill as not keeping up with new approaches to age assurance from other states, including those that initially tried making laws like the one Michigan is proposing. “This bill is an outdated version" of age-verification legislation that has previously "been struck down by the courts,” he said.
Rep. Tyrone Carter (D) said he was skeptical that a restrictive approach will work as lawmakers hope. It's easy to say, "take it from [kids] and shut it down," but "that's not the real world,” he told Tisdel. "We can't control it. I understand you're trying to find a way to manage it, but this is a tough one.”