social media law

A Statement on the Kids Off Social Media Act

In response to today’s Senate Commerce Committee markup of S. 278, the Kids Off Social Media Act (KOSMA), the Consumer Choice Center (CCC) issued the following statement from Stephen Kent, Media Director at the CCC.

The Kids Off Social Media Act (KOSMA) isn’t just an overreach—it’s a direct assault on free expression and consumer privacy. A government-mandated social media ban for users under 13 is a blatant First Amendment violation, preventing minors from accessing even platforms where algorithms are used to curate age-appropriate experiences. The Supreme Court has already affirmed that minors have constitutional rights to information, as clarified in Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association (2011)—but KOSMA ignores that precedent entirely.

This bill also goes beyond banning young users—it restricts content recommendations for anyone under 17, forcing these users into chronological content feeds that don’t take into consideration their unique interests, background or demonstrated preferences. Sponsors of the bill point out that algorithms can systematically serve consumers harmful content, but appear unwilling to acknowledge that the opposite is also true. KOSMA’s approach doesn’t solve safety concerns; it just limits access to information and ties the hands of tech innovators to make customized experiences for consumers of different ages. Worse still, KOSMA pressures platforms into age verification measures that endanger user privacy. While the bill claims verification isn’t required, there’s no other way to comply—meaning platforms will be forced to collect sensitive personal data, exposing all users to potential breaches and government surveillance.

And where does this slippery slope end? If Washington can ban social media for kids today, what’s next? Restrictions on news sites, video streaming, or online gaming? Lawmakers should focus on real solutions—strengthening privacy protections and teaching digital literacy—rather than embracing censorship and surveillance. Protecting kids online should never come at the cost of their rights, but that’s exactly what KOSMA does.


The Consumer Choice Center is an independent, nonpartisan consumer advocacy group championing the benefits of freedom of choice, innovation, and abundance in everyday life for consumers in over 100 countries. We closely monitor regulatory trends in Washington, Brussels, Ottawa, Brasilia, London, and Geneva. Find out more at www.consumerchoicecenter.org.

NetChoice Cases: The First Amendment a back-to-back champ at the Supreme Court

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The First Amendment is a back-to-back champ.

In an opinion delivered on Monday, the nation’s highest court sent back two separate cases brought by industry association NetChoice and other parties against the states of both Texas and Florida for their recent social media laws.

These laws tied the hands of social media companies by not allowing them to moderate the content on their platforms, which would have First Amendment implications.

Yaël Ossowski, deputy director of the consumer advocacy group Consumer Choice Center, responds:

“The issues of social media censorship and jawboning by government agencies are both legitimate and concerning for citizens and online users across the country. Thankfully, however, the Supreme Court recognized that the lawsuits concerning laws passed by both Texas and Florida have not done a proper evaluation of the First Amendment applications and protections afforded to social media companies as well as users,” said Ossowski.

“While this battle will rage on, it is clear that the First Amendment is a clear back-to-back winner in the courts, and we as Internet users and consumers are better off as a result. We are all concerned about getting booted or censored on social media, but it is not by tying the hands of social media networks and forcing them to carry certain information or profiles that we will achieve freer speech online,” added Ossowski.

“Inviting the government to weigh in on content decisions made by private Internet companies is an obvious path to abuse, and one that the NetChoice cases demonstrate rather well. We hope these cases in the lower courts are reconsidered with good faith for the protections that the First Amendment offers while remaining cautious of yet more state regulation of what happens on the Internet.

“The future of free speech online and the First Amendment depend on rejecting overly broad state laws that force content decisions that undermind Section 230,” concluded Ossowski.


About the Consumer Choice Center:

The Consumer Choice Center is a non-profit organization dedicated to defending the rights of consumers around the world. Our mission is to promote freedom of choice, healthy competition, and evidence-based policies that benefit consumers. We work to ensure that consumers have access to a variety of quality products and services and can make informed decisions about their lifestyle and consumption. 

Find out more at www.consumerchoicecenter.org

Scroll to top
en_USEN

Follow us

WASHINGTON

712 H St NE PMB 94982
Washington, DC 20002

BRUSSELS

Rond Point Schuman 6, Box 5 Brussels, 1040, Belgium

LONDON

Golden Cross House, 8 Duncannon Street
London, WC2N 4JF, UK

KUALA LUMPUR

Block D, Platinum Sentral, Jalan Stesen Sentral 2, Level 3 - 5 Kuala Lumpur, 50470, Malaysia

OTTAWA

718-170 Laurier Ave W Ottawa, ON K1P 5V5

© COPYRIGHT 2025, CONSUMER CHOICE CENTER

Also from the Consumer Choice Center: ConsumerChamps.EU | FreeTrade4us.org