SC Senate Could Vote Soon on Age-Appropriate Design Code Act
South Carolina senators are undaunted by potential lawsuits against a proposed state law requiring social media companies to adopt an age-appropriate design code (AADC), said Senate Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee members at a livestreamed hearing Monday. The panel voted unanimously by voice to send the identical S-268 and H-3431 to the Senate floor. The House passed an earlier version of H-3431 in February (see 2502200059).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Several committee members acknowledged court actions invalidating AADC laws in other states following industry lawsuits. Last month, a district court enjoined California’s AADC law, though the state later appealed that ruling (see 2504140058). However, pointing out that the Supreme Court hasn’t ruled on any of the laws, committee Chairman Tom Davis (R) said it’s good for states like South Carolina to continue passing such bills.
"My understanding is that this particular area of law is relatively undeveloped in terms of federal law and what police power the state can exercise,” Davis said. “And so it's my understanding that the only way that's ever going to be adjudicated is for legislatures to act, and then have that challenge, so that there's an opportunity for federal courts to make those adjudications, because they can't do so in a vacuum.”
Sen. Sean Bennett (R), the bill's sponsor, agreed. "We have to take these stands,” especially on an issue like keeping kids safe, he said. Bennett noted earlier that he aimed for “low-touch regulation” that doesn’t prescribe exactly how social media companies make their products safe for children. The senator said he’s not comfortable with proposed language that some have said would address legal concerns because he’s concerned it would “materially change the bill.”
Senate Majority Leader Shane Massey (R) said he would have liked a more aggressive bill but understood Bennett’s desire to narrowly tailor the language to lessen legal risk. “I would much rather take a shot at it and fail as opposed to doing nothing and just wringing our hands." If South Carolina doesn’t get the law right, the courts will “tell us what we did wrong, and then we come back and try to fix it again. Hopefully, we can even be more aggressive.”
Sen. Deon Tedder (D) echoed that opinion. "Some of these companies knew about the defects" harming children and yet "continued to the design,” he said. "While they have tried to hide behind the First Amendment ... we'll let the courts fight that out." Tedder added, “We’re not attempting to restrict speech, but to make sure that the speech is not to the point where there are no guardrails for minors who really don’t have the capacity to make those decisions for themselves.”
“I'm a free market guy," said Sen. Josh Kimbrell (R), but social media is like "crack for the mind of a 14- or 15-year-old." Kimbrell noted that his son is like a different person when he’s on a phone. "I've deleted my son's Instagram and Snapchat accounts three times," but he easily restores his accounts every time, since no parental consent is required.
Streaming TV services would be excluded from the bill under an amendment adopted by voice at the hearing. "There [are] a lot of technology [companies] out there that are afraid to get caught up into this,” Bennett said. The S-268 sponsor said he didn’t think that services like Netflix or Peacock would have been included anyway, but the amendment clarifies they’re not. Chairman Davis said having the exemption will help to show courts that legislators tried to narrowly tailor the bill.
The South Carolina attorney general would enforce the state’s proposed AADC law. Massey said there was discussion in a subcommittee about possibly adding a private right of action, but legislators decided against it.
South Carolina isn’t the only state with AADC legislation this year. Other bills are pending in states including Illinois, Nebraska, Rhode Island and Vermont.