As statehouses ramp up for 2026, we’re seeing a familiar and concerning trend of lawmakers rushing to regulate the internet based on shockingly shaky science. From the **California State Assembly** to the **Massachusetts** and **Minnesota** legislatures, a wave of bills is crashing against the digital lives of young people, with proponents of these measures framing social media access as a "public health epidemic," or a "mental health crisis," even though we have yet to see any of the settled science that those labels usually invoke. As a digital rights organization dedicated to the civil liberties of all users, **EFF’s** expertise lies in reminding lawmakers that young people enjoy largely the same free speech and privacy rights as adults. **EFF** is not a social science research shop, but we can read the emerging research. What that research shows is much more nuanced than what is claimed by those proposing to ban young people from social media, and it is clear that research and theories used to justify these sweeping bans is far from settled. The rush to ban access to digital platforms is being fueled by "pop psychology" narratives and a collection of statistically flawed studies that do not meet the rigorous standards required for such a massive infringement on youth autonomy and constitutional rights. ## The Lie of A "Settled" Consensus The current legislative push relies heavily on a specific, media-friendly narrative that the "great rewiring" of the adolescent brain is a proven fact. This theory suggests that smartphones and social media are the primary, if not sole, drivers of a global uptick in teen anxiety, depression, eating disorders, self harm, etc. While this narrative makes for a compelling airport-bookstore read, it quickly collapses under the scrutiny of the broader scientific community. Independent researchers, including developmental psychologists from institutions like the **University of California, Irvine**, and **Brown University**, have repeatedly found that the evidence for such claims is mixed, blurry, and often contradictory. Large-scale meta-analyses covering dozens of countries have failed to show a consistent, measurable association between the rollout of social media and a decline in global well-being. In reality, we are seeing a classic case of what many of our middle school science teachers warned us about: "correlation" being sold as “causation.” Additionally, the studies used to support these measures often fail to account for or exclude significant alternative explanations for rising teen anxiety and depression, such as the lasting impact of pandemic-era isolation, the persistent threat of school gun violence, and mounting economic or climate-related stress. By focusing narrowly on social media, these findings frequently overlook the broader societal factors that also impact youth mental health. ### The Cult of the "Anxious" Expert The current push for blanket social media bans relies almost exclusively on the work of **Jonathan Haidt**, particularly his book *The Anxious Generation*. While **Haidt** is an amiable and brilliant storyteller, he is not a clinical psychologist or a specialist in child development. He is a social psychologist who writes about moral psychology at a business school. Nonetheless, the book has made it to every , and with **Haidt** revered as an expert on podcasts with massive reach, like **Oprah**, **Joe Rogan**, **Michelle Obama**, and **Trevor Noah**—his message has been heard by a large subset of society, which primarily relies on: no smartphones or social media before age 16, phone-free schools, and more “unsupervised, real-world independence.” To highlight **Haidt’s** reach when it comes to legislation banning social media: the California committee analysis for the proposed California social media ban mentions **Haidt** 20 times; promoted the book as a “must-read” months before signing the nation’s first social media ban; **Haidt** is cited in bill analysis for the bill banning social media in Florida; his work is mentioned in a federal bill aiming to ban phones in schools; and he provided formal testimony before the **U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee (Subcommittee on Technology, Privacy, and the Law)** in May 2022. While **Haidt’s** research has been paramount to legislation stripping millions of young people of their rights to expression and connection, his conclusions are not without challenge, and many experts in the field argue that the evidence is less than ironclad. ## **The “Bad Science” Fueling Social Media Bans** While we can admit that **Jonathan Haidt’s** "great rewiring" theory makes for a gripping narrative, we cannot ignore that independent researchers and statisticians have identified significant flaws in the data used to justify it. Which means we are currently watching policymakers legislate blanket bans based on evidence that would be