Subscriber Benefit
As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe NowOne year after Indiana policymakers enacted a law requiring pornography websites to verify users’ ages, a new bill seeks to further restrict Hoosiers under age 16 from creating social media accounts without “verified” parental permission.
Senate Bill 11, authored by Republican Sen. Mike Bohacek, would require a social media operator like Facebook or TikTok to restrict a minor from accessing the site if they did not receive “verifiable parental consent” from the minor’s parent.
As currently drafted, the bill would additionally allow parents and legal guardians to sue social media providers if their child accesses a site without consent.
Indiana’s attorney general could also issue a civil investigative demand if the office has “reasonable cause to believe” the law was violated. If a social media operator “fails to implement a verifiable parental consent method,” the attorney general would further be allowed to ask a judge to step in and stop a minor from accessing the site, and request a civil penalty of up to $250,000 for each violation, according to the bill.
The bill was heard Wednesday in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Chairwoman Sen. Liz Brown, R-Fort Wayne, said the bill is expected to be amended and voted on by the committee next week.
“We’re not trying to regulate content, of what’s going on the various social media sites — that’s not what we’re trying to do,” said Bohacek, of Michiana Shores. “We’re looking to see, is just the fact that social media itself — regardless of the content that’s inside of it — is that, in and of itself, creating the mental health issues that we’re having right now with a lot of our kids? And I believe that’s what it is.”
The bill would be effective on July 1, if passed.
During the 2024 session, state lawmakers approved Senate Enrolled Act 17, requiring pornography websites to verify user ages. They hoped to keep children from accessing pornography, but adult content companies sued, arguing the law would be costly to implement and violate First Amendment and privacy rights.
A federal judge blocked enforcement last June before its intended July effectiveness date, but an appeals court later rolled back the preliminary injunction. The law is currently in effect while the litigation continues.
Must get consent
Current bill language specifies that “verifiable parental consent” could be obtained “through a method that is reasonably designed to ensure that the person providing the consent is a parent or legal guardian of the minor user.” The proposal also mandates social media providers to establish a procedure to allow a parent or legal guardian to revoke their consent.
At least 10 states have passed laws requiring children’s access to social media be restricted or parental consent gained, and several states’ laws are currently on hold, according to the Age Verification Providers Association, a trade body representing age verification services providers.
Bohacek said he already has multiple amendments to the bill, including to redefine social media, “because the definition we had originally was very, very broad.” The senator said the updated definition will make clear that sites requiring an account, username and password to access content would qualify. Platforms like YouTube, however—which do not necessarily require a user to sign in before accessing the website—would not be included.
Additionally, a provision in the bill to allow parents and guardians to file lawsuits against the companies if their child was subjected to bullying on the social media platform will be removed.
“We didn’t want to go down that road,” Bohacek said, referring to the bullying provision. “That’s going to be a little bit too much.”
Another anticipated amendment would require the attorney general’s office to give social media companies up to 30 days to remedy violations before any civil action is taken.
“The goal is not to just find and punish and penalize. It’s not what we’re trying to do here,” Bohacek said. “What we’re trying to do is getting our kids supervised on this new space, social media, and whatever content their accessing. But then also, if you feel your child is mature enough, and you feel like you want to supervise them enough, then you simply give them access to do that. And there’s a process in here to do that.”
Will restrictions keep kids off social media?
Sen. Rodney Pol, D-Chesterton, questioned whether the bill would actually keep youth from creating online accounts. A virtual private network, or VPN, for example, could allow minors to bypass technology used by social media companies to detect a user’s age.
“If a child used a VPN application in order to get around the law, well, that’s no different than jaywalking or speeding,” Bohacek argued. “You know the law, you went around the law, you just didn’t get caught.”
Concerns were also raised by committee members about joint custody cases, in which one parent or guardian consents to a child’s social media account, but the other parent or guardian does not.
Bohacek said he’d be willing to tweak the bill’s language to clarify that only “a” — meaning one — parent or guardian must provide their permission.
The Indiana Catholic Conference spoke in favor of the bill Wednesday evening. Only Chris Daley, representing the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, spoke in opposition.
He said the bill “clearly infringes on the First Amendment rights of Hoosiers 15 and down, to the degree that those rights attach at certain ages.” Daley pointed to similar laws in Arkansas and Ohio that judges have enjoined — put on hold — amid ongoing legal challenges. If Senate Bill 11 is approved, he expects the law “will eventually be blocked and overturned.”
“I think we all know that this bill will be challenged, and there’s no reason to believe that a court in Indiana — a trial court, federal trial court — will come to a different conclusion,” Daley said. “These cases in Arkansas and Ohio will be resolved, and that could be the appropriate time we all take action. Or, alternatively to that, we could try to do something meaningful.”
Daley recommended for lawmakers to instead invest in mental health resources for Hoosier youth and focus on educating parents “on steps they can take already” to curb their kids’ internet access.
Brown and other Republicans on the committee pushed back.
“All we’re trying to do here, in my opinion … is to try to give parents a tool which they don’t currently have,” Brown said.
The Indiana Capital Chronicle is an independent, not-for-profit news organization that covers state government, policy and elections.
Please enable JavaScript to view this content.
Culture war can of worms that is best left unopened. Let parents decide when to give kids devices and what to allow on them. Keep the state out of it.
Parents are too busy staring at their phones to parent these days
There were similar dire warnings about TV and Boomers. We mostly all survived to become responsible productive adults who were the best educated generation of Americans (until our kids).
Enough with the pearl-clutching and hand-wringing. Screen time never killed anyone.
screen time hasn’t, but social media verifiably has and does, speaking as a dad of two late-teen boys.
the issue is not limiting speech, but strengthening parental rights via-a-vis companies who have a financial incentive to engage children in behavior that frequently malforms their view of self and the world, without their parents knowledge or approval.
not a fan of govt restrictions, but this helps strengthen parents hands vs companies.- while giving parents the ultimate say, as it should be.
Good bill (in concept)
This has been on my radar since Australia did. I think its a great plan. It’s not banning devices – but social media accounts. Great option. Having taught students at high-school and collegiate level. No clue as to what is going on in the world around them and lack of focus and so much abuse and mental health problems that Social Media is brining into these young minds. It has a place, but not for 16 hours a day.
Scott B. and Mark W. have shown support for a common sense bill that will help strengthen and support families. I add my support to that effort as well.
No doubt screens are a dangerous abyss for so many people, esp younger ones. This bill is only as enforceable as parents are willing to make it but provides parameters for parents who haven’t made their own. Can we legislate max daily game time for the same group in this bill? So many under 25s (+ older) who struggle with life or drop out of college due to siren call of gaming. Highly addictive.