Judges in two recent rulings—NetChoice v. Yost and NetChoice v. Hilgers—denigrated the utility of safety and monitoring tools that internet and technology companies provide to help parents protect minors online. Why? They found that savvy kids sometimes evade them through work-arounds and lies, while parents can’t track the platforms their children use.

This year’s State of the European Union address by European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen drew a bated breath for many in the digital rights community, as we awaited the announcement of the EU Kids Act, new legislation aimed at creating a safer online environment for minors.

This post is the first in a series examining the settlement’s consequences for users’ free speech and privacy rights. Later posts will address the settlement’s age-assurance requirements, its competition problems, the settlement’s enforcement mechanisms, and better ways to make online services safer for young people while still protecting their rights. This post focuses on a foundational problem with the settlement: it transforms Meta’s private content-moderation policies into legally enforceable obligations. In doing so, it gives government officials legal authority to shape what millions of young people may read, watch, and discuss online.

The AAP and Apple are teaming up to help families establish healthy digital habits as the tech company rolls out new child safety features. Together, they will adapt the AAP’s Family Media Plan to guide parents, Apple announced Monday at its Worldwide Developers Conference.

The EU Commission draft law to restrict young people’s access to the internet that it presented last week will come at a high cost: it will put online services behind age gates, expand the use of intrusive age verification, and undermine the privacy of all users.

The latest social media ban for kids? All 27 countries in the European Union. Announced Thursday after plans revealed in July, the proposed EU KIDS Act will "enhance the online safety of children," banning kids in the EU under 15 from setting up their own accounts on social media platforms like TikTok, Instagram, and Snapchat.

Smartphones and social media are now central to adolescent life, prompting understandable concern about teens’ mental health, sleep, school performance, and compulsive use. Policymakers have responded with enacted or proposed age bans, verification requirements, parental-consent mandates, time limits, school-phone restrictions, and warning labels. This white paper assesses the evidence behind these interventions, their unintended consequences, and their constitutional durability.

California, a state once brimming with optimism for a free and open internet, is now leading the country in online safety regulation. On Thursday, California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom signed 13 bills into law "strengthening California's nation-leading protections for children online."

On a global scale, we have seen a rise in the development and enactment of legislation that bans minors from using social media to keep them safe. But what does early evidence of these bills tell us about whether they are working as intended? What’s the case for age-appropriate spaces and content instead? And should chatbots be regulated similarly?