Dozens of Tech Safety Groups Urge House to Reject KIDS Package
Dozens of tech safety groups urge – More than 90 organizations dedicated to digital safety and child protection have asked House lawmakers to oppose the KIDS Act, a revised version of a comprehensive online safety bill. The groups argue that the legislation, which could be debated as early as next Monday, fails to adequately address risks facing young internet users and provides insufficient safeguards for platforms that cater to children.
Landmark Provisions at Risk
The KIDS Act includes the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), a significant component of the original proposal that aimed to hold tech companies accountable for harms to minors. However, the safety groups are concerned that the bill weakens key provisions, allowing major technology firms to avoid stricter oversight. By removing the duty of care requirement, which would have legally obligated platforms to “exercise reasonable care” in preventing harm, the legislation shifts responsibility away from companies and onto users, they claim.
Signatories of the letter, sent on Friday, include prominent entities such as the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (NCOSE), the youth-driven coalition Design It for Us, the tech watchdog group Tech Oversight Project, and the artificial intelligence safety organization Encode. These groups warn that the KIDS Act’s changes make it easier for Big Tech to evade accountability for issues like eating disorders, suicide, substance use disorders, and sexual exploitation, which are prevalent on online platforms.
House Leadership Moves Forward
House Energy and Commerce Committee Chair Brett Guthrie (R-Ky.) and Rep. Frank Pallone (D-N.J.) announced an agreement on the KIDS Act, marking a breakthrough after months of stalled negotiations. The bipartisan deal, which they described as a “common ground on policies to significantly improve the digital environment for kids,” is set to be introduced to the House floor via a fast-track procedure known as the suspension of the rules. This process requires a two-thirds majority for passage, a threshold that could influence the bill’s fate.
According to the House schedule, the KIDS Act may be debated as soon as Monday, raising questions about its timeline and potential impact. The lawmakers assert that the bill represents the most robust online safety measure to date, emphasizing its ability to hold major technology companies accountable through comprehensive regulations.
Removing the Duty of Care
One of the primary concerns raised by the safety groups is the elimination of the duty of care, a cornerstone of the original KOSA. This provision would have compelled platforms to actively monitor and mitigate risks to children, such as harmful content exposure and addictive design features. By removing it, the bill leaves companies with fewer obligations, allowing them to focus on implementing “reasonable policies, practices, and procedures” rather than addressing systemic issues.
Dani Pinter, NCOSE’s chief legal officer and director of the Law Center, criticized the change during an interview with The Hill. “Not only does the KIDS Act remove the duty of care, it affirmatively disavows it,” Pinter stated. “Rather than being silent, the bill explicitly states that nothing in it shall be construed to impart a duty of care, effectively undoing the safeguards that were central to KOSA.” She added that the duty of care was the “heart and soul” of the original act, which had been proposed four times in 2022 before being shelved.
“Stripping the duty of care does not lighten a regulatory burden; it removes the most important obligation requiring these products to be designed safely in the first place,” the groups wrote in their letter.
Broader Scope of the Bill
The safety groups also highlighted that the KIDS Act’s scope is narrower than initially envisioned, covering only a subset of social media platforms and digital services. While the original KOSA targeted major tech companies, the revised version includes video games, video streaming services, and messaging apps, but may overlook larger platforms with more extensive reach. This shift, the groups argue, dilutes the bill’s effectiveness in addressing widespread risks, such as algorithmic manipulation and data privacy concerns.
Advocates Feel Overlooked
Parent and child advocacy representatives expressed frustration over their perceived exclusion from the legislative process. Pinter noted that they felt “not given a seat at the table” during the bipartisan negotiations, leaving critical concerns unaddressed. The KIDS Act’s supporters, including House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) and House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.), have defended the bill, claiming it offers the best chance to protect children online. However, the safety groups insist that the revised version fails to meet the needs of families and young users.
Earlier this week, a House Energy and Commerce Committee spokesperson emphasized the bill’s importance, stating, “Our bipartisan bill addresses the kinds of harms that are pervasive on the internet, and suggestions otherwise are flat out wrong.” The spokesperson framed the KIDS Act as a necessary step to enforce accountability on platforms, particularly in their default settings and core design choices.
“It’s time to protect children and teens in the default settings and the basic design of platforms to put a stop to the predators who are taking advantage of kids,” the spokesperson added.
Public Reaction and Advocacy
On Tuesday, safety and parent groups gathered at Capitol Hill for the Social Media Victims Remembrance Day rally, where they highlighted the significance of the duty of care provision. Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), a key co-author of the original KOSA, reiterated his opposition to its removal. “Nothing complicated about the duty of care,” Blumenthal said. “If you make a defective toaster and it blows up in someone’s home, they’re liable. If you make a defective car and it careens into a tree, they’re liable.”
The safety groups argue that the KIDS Act’s compromise—replacing the duty of care with a more lenient standard—risks undermining the most critical protections for minors. They believe the bill’s language allows companies to claim compliance without making substantial changes to their design or content moderation practices. For example, platforms could maintain “reasonable policies” without addressing addictive features or harmful content, according to the groups.
While the House leadership continues to push for the KIDS Act’s passage, the opposition remains steadfast. The coalition of safety organizations maintains that the bill’s changes weaken its ability to safeguard children in the digital age. As the House prepares to debate the measure, the tension between reformers and critics underscores the challenges of balancing corporate interests with the well-being of young internet users.
With the KIDS Act potentially moving forward, the debate over digital safety is set to intensify. Advocates on both sides will need to demonstrate the urgency of their positions, ensuring that the final version of the bill reflects the needs of children and the responsibilities of technology companies. The outcome of this legislative push could shape the future of online safety in the United States for years to come.
