Google Declines Public Support of Pa. Kids’ Bill Amid Mixed Signals

Google is unwilling to publicly support a kids’ social media proposal in Pennsylvania, despite the House Children and Youth Committee announcing the company’s backing Wednesday (see 2406050055).

The committee postponed a vote on the Online Safety Protection Act (HB-1879) during Wednesday’s hearing after ranking member Barry Jozwiak (R) raised procedural objections. Chair Donna Bullock's (D) bill requires that online platforms consider the “best interests of children” when developing products and features “that children are likely to access.” Under the proposal, the attorney general could seek injunctions and civil penalties up to $7,500 per affected child. Maryland Gov. Wes Moore (D) signed a similar bill into law in May (see 2405090049), and another proposal is on the desk of Vermont Gov. Phil Scott (R). All three measures take an approach similar to the California Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, a law the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California enjoined.

Staff for the committee in Pennsylvania announced Google’s support for HB-1879 during Wednesday’s hearing. Google didn’t comment Wednesday. On Thursday it said: “We don't have a statement to provide at this time.” Meanwhile, Bullock on Thursday deferred comment to Google. She remained silent on the veracity of the committee’s announcement or on a question about whether the company was back-tracking.

Google is a member of NetChoice, TechNet and the Computer & Communications Industry Association. The three associations have repeatedly raised constitutional issues related to kids’ safety measures in other states. TechNet said Thursday the Pennsylvania bill “repeats many of the constitutional flaws” seen in states like California. Children deserve a “heightened level of protection” online, but HB-1879’s “overly broad definitions would lead to different interpretations -- varying widely from company to company, from attorneys general enforcing the bill, and from household to household," Executive Director-Mid-Atlantic Margaret Durkin said. Lawmakers should “avoid policies that jeopardize privacy, censor lawful speech, confuse businesses, and put up barriers to internet access and education for young adults,” she added. NetChoice and CCIA didn’t comment Thursday.

Jozwiak argued Wednesday that certain aspects of the bill are “unenforceable,” based on concerns from AG Michelle Henry (D) about the bill’s “overly broad” terms and definitions. Moreover, the AG lacks the resources to enforce it, Jozwiak argued. He didn’t comment Thursday.

Bullock planned to file an amendment Wednesday tweaking some language, including terms like “best interests of a child.” The amendment would have extended the effective date of the bill from 60 days to December 2025.

The bill’s stated goal is protecting the “best interests of children that use online services, products or features.” Platforms that develop such products should “prioritize the privacy, safety and well-being of children over commercial interests,” the bill says. It covers users younger than 18 when companies have “actual knowledge” of age. The AG would be able to seek civil penalties up to $2,500 per “affected child” for “negligent” violations and $7,500 per affected child for “intentional” violations. It provides companies with a 90-day right to cure alleged violations.