TL;DR: The Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA) would require social media platforms to exercise a "duty of care" to protect minors from mental health harms, disable addictive features by default, and publish transparency reports. It has strong bipartisan support and is expected to advance in 2026. Critics including the ACLU and EFF warn it could lead to censorship of LGBTQ+ content, incentivize age verification that undermines privacy for everyone, and burden smaller platforms. The bill doesn't mandate age verification, but platforms may implement it to comply, affecting all users.
What KOSA Does
The Kids Online Safety Act (S.1748) establishes new requirements for "covered platforms" (essentially large social media services):[1]
Duty of Care
- Platforms must "exercise reasonable care" to prevent and mitigate specific harms to minors
- Covered harms include: depression, anxiety, eating disorders, substance abuse, suicidal behaviors, bullying, harassment, sexual exploitation, and "compulsive usage"
Design Requirements
- Disable "addictive" features by default for minors (infinite scroll, autoplay, notifications)
- Provide options to opt out of personalized algorithmic recommendations
- Enable the strongest privacy settings by default for minors
Parental Controls
- Parents must be given tools to manage children's privacy and account settings
- Controls for in-app purchases and screen time monitoring
- Reporting mechanisms for harmful content
Transparency
- Annual third-party audits
- Public transparency reports on risks to minors and mitigation measures
Current Status
KOSA's legislative journey:[2]
- July 2024: Senate passed combined KOSA + COPPA 2.0 (Kids Online Safety and Privacy Act)
- 2024: House did not vote before session ended
- May 2025: Bill reintroduced in 119th Congress (2025-2026)
- January 2026: House Energy and Commerce Committee working on bipartisan markup
The bill has strong bipartisan support and is expected to advance in the current Congress.
Who Supports KOSA
Child Safety Advocates
Groups focused on mental health, eating disorders, and child exploitation see KOSA as essential accountability.
Parent Organizations
Parents concerned about social media's impact on children's mental health back the parental control provisions.
Bipartisan Legislators
Rare bipartisan agreement, with both Republican and Democratic sponsors, reflects shared concern about child safety.
Public Support
Polling shows broad support for child protection online, even among those concerned about other aspects.
Who Opposes KOSA
Privacy and civil liberties organizations have raised significant concerns:[3]
ACLU Concerns
- Vague "duty of care" could lead to censorship of lawful speech
- Content about LGBTQ+ issues, reproductive health, and other topics could be restricted under broad "harm" definitions
- Platforms may over-censor to avoid liability
EFF Concerns
- Bill doesn't mandate age verification but will incentivize it
- Age verification systems collect personal data and undermine online anonymity
- Smaller platforms face disproportionate compliance burden
- State attorneys general enforcement could lead to politically motivated actions
LGBTQ+ Organizations
- Fear that content providing support for LGBTQ+ youth will be labeled "harmful" and restricted
- In some states, officials may interpret "harm" to include exposure to LGBTQ+ content
- Could isolate vulnerable youth who rely on online communities
The Age Verification Problem
KOSA doesn't directly require age verification. But platforms may implement it to comply, with implications for everyone:
- ID verification: Requiring upload of government ID to access services
- Facial recognition: Age estimation based on face scans
- Third-party databases: Cross-referencing personal information
Privacy implications:
- Data collection increases: now platforms know your real identity
- Data breaches become more dangerous when real IDs are stored
- Anonymity online becomes harder to maintain
- Chilling effect on lawful adult speech (people avoid controversial content to avoid verification)
Enforcement
If enacted, KOSA would be enforced by:[4]
- Federal Trade Commission (FTC): Primary federal enforcement
- State Attorneys General: Can bring enforcement actions in their states
The state AG enforcement concerns critics because enforcement priorities vary by state political leadership. An AG in one state might pursue platforms for content another state considers protected speech.
Alternative Approaches
Critics suggest different approaches to child safety online:
- Strengthen privacy laws: Limit data collection rather than content, reducing targeting of minors
- Fund digital literacy: Education for parents and children about online safety
- Enforce existing laws: Better funding for existing child protection enforcement
- Design standards: Focus on specific features (autoplay, notifications) rather than broad content liability
- Device-level controls: Parental controls at the operating system level rather than platform level
What to Watch
Key developments in 2026:
House Markup
House Energy and Commerce Committee is preparing bipartisan markup in January 2026. Watch for amendments.
LGBTQ+ Protections
Will the bill include explicit protections preventing use against LGBTQ+ content? Amendments may clarify.
Age Verification Language
Will explicit limits on age verification be added to prevent the most invasive implementations?
State Preemption
Will federal law preempt stricter state laws, or will it set a floor with states free to go further?
The Bottom Line
KOSA attempts to address a real problem: social media platforms designed to maximize engagement can harm children's mental health. The evidence of harm is substantial.
But the solution creates new problems. A vague "duty of care" enforced by state attorneys general could lead to politically motivated censorship. Age verification to identify minors could undermine privacy for everyone. Broad definitions of "harm" could restrict access to information that helps vulnerable youth.
The bill reflects genuine tension between protecting children and protecting civil liberties. Both concerns are valid. The question is whether this particular legislation strikes the right balance, or creates new harms while addressing old ones.
Watch the House markup. See what amendments emerge. The final version may look quite different from the current text.