Why It Matters

The House and Senate are pursuing divergent approaches to kids online safety, with a House-passed bill requiring social media platforms to implement safeguards for minors, while a Senate version adds a "duty of care" standard that the House rejected.

A new Congressional Research Service (CRS) report on competing legislative approaches reveals deep disagreements between chambers that could determine whether any protections become law under the Trump administration.

The House passed H.R. 7757 on June 29 by a vote of 267–117, embedding a "Kids Online Safety" section that would impose harm mitigation requirements on covered platforms to address threats of physical violence, sexual exploitation, drug and alcohol promotion, and deceptive financial practices. The bill would also require platforms to restrict communications with minors, limit profile visibility, hide online status, limit compulsive design features, and restrict geolocation sharing. Currently, no federal law requires such safeguards.

The Senate's competing version, S. 1748, was advanced by the Commerce Committee on August 5 but includes a "duty of care" provision that the House bill lacks. That provision requires platforms to exercise reasonable care in design features to prevent harms including eating disorders, substance use disorders, suicidal behaviors, anxiety, and compulsive usage patterns. The duty of care standard has drawn criticism from both sides. Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) and Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) publicly criticized the removal of the duty of care provision from the House bill, while civil liberties groups have raised First Amendment concerns about the provision itself.

The Big Picture

The two bills diverge significantly on scope, enforcement standards, and design requirements. S. 1748 explicitly includes online video games, messaging apps, and video streaming services in its definition of "covered platform," a broader net than H.R. 7757 casts. The bills also employ different knowledge standards: H.R. 7757 uses "know or should have known," while S. 1748 uses "actual knowledge or knowledge fairly implied on the basis of objective circumstances." S. 1748 directs the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to issue guidance on its knowledge standard, a step H.R. 7757 does not take.

H.R. 7757 requires all platforms to respond to harm reports within 10 days, while S. 1748 gives smaller platforms, those with fewer than 10 million monthly active users, 21 days to respond. H.R. 7757 explicitly addresses direct and ephemeral messaging requirements with specific teen controls, a gap in S. 1748.

Both bills designate the FTC and state attorneys general as enforcement bodies. H.R. 7757 would preempt conflicting state laws while preserving states' ability to enact stronger minor protections and explicitly protecting tort, contract, and product liability law from preemption. Neither bill requires age gating or age verification.

The House bill requires platforms to provide parents with tools to view and manage privacy settings, restrict purchases, set time limits, receive messaging notifications, and disable direct messaging. Teens would receive controls over who can contact them, the ability to hide profiles, and the option to disable messaging. The "Kids Online Safety" section of H.R. 7757 would require independent third-party audits within 18 months of enactment and annually thereafter, with results submitted to the FTC. H.R. 7757 would also restrict ads for minor users, prohibiting advertisements for drugs, cannabis, tobacco, gambling, and alcohol.

The Bottom Line

As H.R. 7757 heads to the Senate, where it reportedly faces long odds, the chamber will need to resolve disagreements on preemption, knowledge standards, and the duty of care standard. The outcome will determine whether the two chambers can reconcile their competing visions of platform accountability before sending legislation to President Trump's desk.

***

Access the Legis1 platform for comprehensive political news, data, and insights

---

Spot something wrong? Report an issue with this article