Alabama bill requiring age verification for app downloads sparks debate
Rep. Chris Sells, R-Greenville, sits in a House Child and Senior Advocacy Committee meeting on Feb. 26, 2025. The committee heard support and opposition on his bill, HB 317, that would require app store age verification. (Anna Barrett/Alabama Reflector)
An Alabama bill requiring app stores to verify users' ages drew debate during a committee hearing last week.
HB 317, sponsored by Chris Sells, R-Greenville, would prohibit a minor from downloading a new app or updating an existing app without parental consent. In order for app stores to know whether someone is a minor, the platforms would have to implement age verification under the legislation.
Supporters of the bill said Wednesday that parents support this regulation. Those who oppose the legislation said it would create a false sense of security, and the law would likely be challenged in court for violating users' privacy.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
'Other age verification methods of the social media sites have all been solved in court,' Justin Hill from NetChoice told the House Child and Senior Advocacy Committee. 'One like this hasn't made it out of the legislature yet, so maybe Alabama can be the first to defend that in court.'
NetChoice advocates for limited internet government control, free speech and enterprise across the country. The group has fought many internet laws nationwide. Hill mentioned laws in Florida and Virginia that created online literacy courses for minors. He said an education-based law, rather than a mandate, would be constitutional.
'And we really need to remember that an unconstitutional law helps no children,' he said.
Nicole Lopez, safety policy director for youth at Meta, said the bill provides parental control. She said a small study conducted on behalf of Meta showed that 80% of parents want app store age verification.
'Parents want a one-stop shop to verify their child's age before they can download apps,' Lopez said. 'HB 317 is the mechanism to achieve just that, with an immediate impact on Alabama families supporting their teens online.'
NetChoice opposed a similar bill that would require age verification for social media accounts on Feb. 19. Meta implemented Instagram Teen Accounts in September that have built-in protections, limiting who can contact them and the content they see, while also providing new ways to safely explore their interests.
Melea Stephens, a family therapist, said she supported the bill because of how she has seen the internet affect her clients.
'As a family therapist, I witnessed firsthand the devastating impact of unregulated apps and what they can have on our youth,' she said. 'I've treated several cases of child sextortion and sexual abuse that have arisen through platforms marketed to children where predators exploit the very apps designed to foster connection and entertainment.'
Knox Argo, an attorney based in Montgomery, said he opposed the bill because it is being pushed by Meta.
'We certainly don't want to be the first in the nation to stick our neck out on some new bill that is pushed by a multimillion-dollar corporation,' he said.
Meta is worth $1.7 trillion.
The committee did not vote on the bill. Rep. Ginny Shaver, R-Leesburg, the chair of the committee, said she'd put it on the agenda in a couple weeks.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Hill
17 minutes ago
- The Hill
Jeffries says Trump ‘intentionally' inflaming unrest in Los Angeles
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) is hammering President Trump over the clashes in Los Angeles, saying the president is purposefully escalating tensions to distract the country from a volatile economy. Speaking to reporters in the Capitol, Jeffries railed against Trump's aggressive deportation policies and defended the rights of Americans to protest such government actions — if it's done peacefully. He accused Trump of 'fanning flames and inciting things on the ground' to distract from a domestic policy agenda that Jeffries has dubbed 'a failure.' 'Donald Trump is clearly trying to distract from the fact that he has a failed administration,' Jeffries said. The Democratic leader also dismissed Trump's argument that, by intervening in the L.A. immigration protests, he's simply bringing law and order to a city where local officials have failed to do so. Jeffries noted that Trump, for hours, had declined to intervene on Jan. 6, 2021, when a mob of his supporters attacked law enforcers at the U.S. Capitol in an effort to block the certification of Trump's election defeat a few months earlier. In January, Trump pardoned roughly 1,500 of the rioters — a move that, according to Jeffries, gives Trump and his supporters 'zero credibility' to claim the mantle of law and order. 'Donald Trump wasn't a leader on Jan. 6. He didn't send the National Guard to stop the violent mob that was brutally beating police officers in plain view for every single American to see,' Jeffries said. 'And this guy, who likely withheld the National Guard — he certainly didn't send them forward — is lecturing the country about law and order?' 'Give me a break. We're not feeling you — particularly as it relates to this issue,' he continued. 'Donald Trump and all of these minions who support him — the sycophants, the extremists — have zero credibility on this issue. Republicans have become the party of lawlessness and disorder.' Amid the unrest in L.A., Trump over the weekend activated members of the National Guard, drawing criticisms from California officials — notably Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) — who said local law enforcement agencies are sufficiently equipped to handle the situation without the involvement of federal troops. Newsom announced Monday that he is suing the administration over the federal intervention. 'This is a manufactured crisis,' Newsom posted on X. 'He is creating fear and terror to take over a state militia and violate the U.S. constitution.' Jeffries is standing squarely behind Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass (D), a former member of the House, who have both argued that local and state law enforcers in California have the faculties and manpower to protect both First Amendment rights and public safety. 'The LAPD, the L.A. Sheriff's Department, other local law enforcement, and the California Highway Patrol, seem to have the capacity to make sure that the situation is addressed — that peaceful protests are allowed to occur, and that law-breakers are held accountable,' Jeffries said.
The Hill
20 minutes ago
- The Hill
Billie Eilish's brother Finneas says he was tear-gassed during LA anti-ICE protest
LOS ANGELES (KTLA) — Finneas, the brother of singer Billie Eilish, said he was impacted by the anti-ICE protests in downtown Los Angeles over the weekend. On Sunday, he took to Instagram to describe what was happening around L.A. 'Tear-gassed almost immediately at the very peaceful protest downtown. They're inciting this,' he wrote on his Instagram Story about the clashes between demonstrators and law enforcement. The record producer then reposted several Instagram posts slamming the Trump administration and ICE for the federal immigration raids that began on Friday within the region. The raids sparked various protests across the city. Critics say President Donald Trump heightened the tensions by deploying the California National Guard into Los Angeles without permission from California Gov. Gavin Newsom. Approximately 300 National Guard members arrived in the city over the weekend. Trump said he authorized 2,000 members to deploy if needed. Both Newsom and L.A. Mayor Karen Bass have blamed the president for inciting the chaos over the weekend. 'Donald Trump is putting fuel on this fire. Commandeering a state's National Guard without consulting the Governor of that state is illegal and immoral. California will be taking him to court,' Newsom said on X. In the meantime, Trump calls his decision a 'great idea.' 'The people that are causing these problems are professional agitators, they're insurrectionists, they're bad people. They should be in jail.' Trump said. In a post to Truth Social, he said both Newsom and Bass should thank him and that the troops were necessary.
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Judge denies Michael Madigan's motion for new trial, setting stage for high-stakes sentencing Friday
A federal judge on Monday denied a motion by former House Speaker Michael Madigan seeking to overturn his recent conviction on bribery and other corruption counts, setting the stage for a high-stakes sentencing hearing later this week. Madigan, 83, was back in the federal courtroom for the first time since a jury convicted him nearly four months ago. But unlike his marathon trial, Monday's hearing was brief. After both sides waived oral arguments on the defense motion, U.S. District Judge John Robert Blakey announced he was denying it, though his ruling, which he said is more than 100 pages long, won't be made public for some time. Madigan sat through the 15-minute hearing without comment and walked out carrying an umbrella. Blakey is holding another hearing Tuesday to go over issues on the sentencing guidelines in Madigan's case, which hinge partly on how much money ComEd stood to gain because of legislation the speaker helped usher through the legislative process. Madigan's attorneys are also asking Blakey to strike language from a prosecution filing last Friday revealing for the first time publicly that Madigan 'has amassed a personal fortune of more than $40 million' — a disclosure reported by the Tribune over the weekend. The defense wrote in a motion filed ahead of Monday's hearing that Madigan served the public as a legislator and lawyer for more than 60 years and 'chose frugality over extravagance, remaining in the same modest home for more than fifty years while making prudent savings and investment choices.' 'The government offers zero evidence—absolutely nothing—to justify broadcasting specific details about his net worth,' the motion stated. 'The government's decision to splash his personal financial information across a public filing represents a gross breach of the rules.' Blakey said he'd take up the issue on Tuesday. Madigan's sentencing, set for Friday afternoon, is one of the most highly anticipated hearings in years at the Dirksen U.S. Courthouse. Prosecutors have asked for a hefty 12 1/2 year prison term and $1.5 million fine, while the defense is seeking probation along with a period of home confinement. Madigan's defense team filed a motion in March arguing for a new trial in his corruption case, saying prosecutors failed to prove the then-powerful Democrat knew about a scheme by ComEd to pay off his associates and alleging Blakey made a series of mistakes in his evidentiary rulings. The 73-page motion alleged those errors tainted the jury with highly prejudicial evidence, and asked Blakey to reverse the jury's verdict on certain guilty counts and grant a new trial on others. Among the missteps that Madigan's legal team says warrants a new trial: letting in a now-infamous FBI wiretap where Madigan tells his longtime confidant, Michael McClain, that some ComEd contractors 'made out like bandits' for little work; allowing the jury to hear prejudicial testimony about sexual harassment allegations; and including a recorded phone call between McClain and the speaker's son, Andrew Madigan, about another public utility, Peoples Gas, being forced to make political hires. The defense filing also argued that despite the jury's guilty verdict, prosecutors failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Madigan knew about any scheme to enrich his friends or that there was a 'this-for-that' agreement to help shepherd ComEd's legislation in Springfield. 'Michael Madigan is not corrupt. He never exchanged his duty to serve his constituents for private benefit — the essence of corruption,' the filing stated. 'For decades, Madigan sought to ensure ComEd did not get away with ripping off consumers in Illinois. Madigan's primary purpose was to work hard for his community and the Democratic party.' Such post-trial motions are routine and rarely granted. But the filing provides a blueprint for a likely appeal to the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Madigan's trial capped one of the most significant political corruption investigations in Chicago's checkered history. It also cemented an extraordinary personal fall for Madigan, the longest-serving state legislative leader in the nation's history who for decades held an iron-tight grip on the House as well as the state Democratic Party. After 11 days of deliberation, the jury's final verdict was mixed. Madigan was convicted of 10 of 23 counts, including marquee allegations that he agreed to squeeze lucrative, do-nothing contracts from ComEd for pals such as former Alds. Frank Olivo and Michael Zalewski and precinct captains Ray Nice and Edward Moody, all while the utility won a series of major legislation victories. Madigan was also convicted on six out of seven counts — including wire fraud and Travel Act violations — regarding a plan to get ex-Ald. Daniel Solis, a key FBI mole who testified at length in the trial, appointed to a state board. Jurors deadlocked on all six counts related to Madigan's co-defendant McClain. jmeisner@
