California lawmakers are fast-tracking A.B. 1709—a sweeping bill that would ban anyone under 16 from using social media *and* force every user, regardless of age, to verify their identity before accessing social platforms. That means that under this bill, all Californians would be required to submit highly sensitive government-issued ID or biometric information to private companies simply to participate in the modern public square. In the name of “safety,” this bill would destroy online anonymity, expose sensitive personal data to breach and abuse, and replace parental decision-making with state-mandated censorship. A.B. 1709 has already passed out of the Assembly Privacy and Judiciary Committees with nearly unanimous support. Its next stop is the Assembly Appropriations Committee, followed by a floor vote—likely within the next week. [Take action](https://act.eff.org/action/stop-california-s-social-media-ban-a-b-1709) [Tell Your Representative to OPPOSE A.B. 1709](https://act.eff.org/action/stop-california-s-social-media-ban-a-b-1709) ### **California Is About to Set a Dangerous Precedent for Online Censorship** By banning access to social media platforms for young people under 16, California is emulating Australia, where early results show exactly what **EFF** and other critics predicted: overblocking by platforms, leaving [youth without support](https://thewest.com.au/politics/federal-politics/distressed-teens-turn-to-kids-helpline-following-social-media-ban-saying-theyve-lost-support-networks-c-21237507) and even adults barred from access; major spikes in VPN use and other [workarounds](https://www.techspot.com/news/112049-australia-social-media-ban-kids-mostly-isnt-working.html) ranging from clever to desperate; and smaller platforms shutting down rather than attempting costly compliance with these sweeping bills. California should not be racing to replicate those failures. After all, when California leads—especially on tech—other states follow. There is no reason for California to lead the nation into an unconstitutional social media ban that destroys privacy and harms youth. [Take action](https://act.eff.org/action/stop-california-s-social-media-ban-a-b-1709) [Tell Your Representative to OPPOSE A.B. 1709](https://act.eff.org/action/stop-california-s-social-media-ban-a-b-1709) ### **What’s Wrong With A.B. 1709?** Just about everything. A.B. 1709 [weaponizes](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2026/03/rep-finke-was-right-age-gating-isnt-about-kids-its-about-control) legitimate parental concerns by using them to hand over even more censorship and surveillance power to the government. Beneath its shiny “protect the children” rhetoric, this bill is misguided, unconstitutional, and deeply harmful to users of all ages. #### **A.B. 1709 Recklessly Violates Free Speech Rights** The First Amendment protects the right to speak and access information, regardless of age. But by imposing a blanket ban on social media access, A.B. 1709 would cut off lawful speech for millions of California teenagers, while also forcing *all* users (adults and kids alike) to verify their ages before speaking or accessing information on social media. This will immensely and unconstitutionally chill Californians’ exercise of their First Amendment. These mandates ignore longstanding Supreme Court precedent that protects young people’s speech and consistently find these bans unconstitutional. Banning young people entirely from social media is an extreme measure that doesn’t match the actual risks of online engagement. California simply does not have a valid interest in overriding parents’ and young people’s rights to decide for themselves how to use social media. After all, age-verification technology is [far from perfect](https://www.eff.org/pages/age-verification-systems-are-surveillance-systems#main-content). A.B. 1709’s reliance on imperfect age-verification technology will disproportionately silence marginalized communities—those whose IDs don’t match their presentation, those with disabilities, trans and gender non-conforming folks, and people of color—who are most likely to be wrongfully denied access by discriminatory systems. Finally, many people will simply refuse to give up their [anonymity](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2023/03/age-verification-mandates-would-undermine-anonymity-online) in order to access social media. Our right to anonymity has been a cornerstone of free expression since the founding of this country, and a pillar of online safety since the dawn of the internet. This is for good reason: it allows creativity, innovation, and political thought to flourish, and is essential for those who risk retaliation for their speech or associations. A.B. 1709 threatens to destroy it. #### **AB 1709 Needlessly Jeopardizes Everyone’s Privacy** A.B. 1709’s age verification mandate also creates massive security risks by forcing users to hand over immutable biometric data and government IDs to third-party vendors. By creating centralized "honeypots" of sensitive information, the bill invites identity theft and permanent surveillance rather than actual safety. If we don’t trust tech companies with our private information now, we shouldn't pass a law that mandates we give them even more of it. We’ve already seen [repeated](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/06/hack-age-verification-company-shows-privacy-danger-social-media-laws)[data](https://www.404media.co/women-dating-safety-app-tea-breached-users-ids-posted-to-4chan/)[breaches](https://www.404media.co/the-discord-hack-is-every-users-worst-nightmare/) involving age- and identity-verification services. Yet A.B. 1709 would require millions more Californians—including the youth this bill claims to protect—to feed their most sensitive data into this growing surveillance ecosystem. This is not the answer to online safety. [Take action](https://act.eff.org/action/stop-california-s-social-media-ban-a-b-1709) [Tell Your Representative to OPPOSE A.B. 1709](https://act.eff.org/action/stop-california-s-social-media-ban-a-b-1709) #### **AB 1709 Harms the Youth It Claims to Protect** While framed as a safety measure, this bill serves as a blunt instrument of censorship, severing vital lifelines for California’s young people. Besides being unconstitutional, banning young people from the internet is bad public policy. After all, social media sites are not just sources of entertainment; they provide crucial spaces for young people to explore their identities—whether by creating and sharing art, practicing religion, building community, or engaging in civic life. Social science [indicates](https://www.techdirt.com/2026/01/21/two-major-studies-125000-kids-the-social-media-panic-doesnt-hold-up/) that moderate internet use is a net positive for teens’ development, and negative outcomes are usually due to either lack of access or excessive use. Social media provides essential spaces for civic engagement, identity exploration, and community building—particularly for [LGBTQ+](https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2025/12/03/young-adults-and-the-future-of-news/) and [marginalized youth](https://medicalxpress.com/news/2020-07-marginalized-youth-socially-isolated-previous.html) who may lack support in their physical environments. By replacing access to [political news](https://www.pewresearch.org/journalism/2025/12/03/young-adults-and-the-future-of-news/) and [health](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1089/jwh.2024.0563)[resources](https://www.woodhullfoundation.org/press-release/report-age-verification-sex-educators/) with state-mandated isolation, A.B. 1709 ignores the calls of young people themselves who favor digital literacy and education over restrictive government control. Young people have been [loud and clear](https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2024/03/thousands-young-people-told-us-why-kids-online-safety-act-will-be-harmful-minors) that what they want is access and education—not censorship and control. They even [drafted their own](https://edsource.org/2026/social-media-ai-mental-health/755990) digital literacy education bill, A.B. 2071, which is currently before the California legislature! Instead of cutting off vital lifelines, we should support education measures that would arm them (and the adults in their lives) with the knowledge they need to explore online spaces safely. #### **AB 1709 Is Misguided and Won’t Work** In case you needed more reasons to oppose this bill. * **A.B. 1709 Replaces Parenting With Government Control.** Families know there is no one-size-fits-all solution to parenting. But AB 1709 imposes one anyway, overriding parental decision-making with a blanket censorship prohibition. Parents who want to actively guide their children’s online experiences should be empowered, not relegated to the sidelines by a blunt state mandate. * **A.B. 1709 Strengthens Big Tech Instead of Challenging It.** Supporters claim that this bill will rein in the major tech companies, but in fact, steep fines and costly compliance regimes [disproportionately harm smaller platforms](https://www.eff.org/pages/age-gates-are-windfall-big-tech-and-death-sentence-smaller-platforms#main-content). Where large corporations can afford to absorb legal risk and shell out for expensive verification systems, smaller forums and emerging p