Policy

Senate Commerce Panel Advances Five Kids Online Safety Bills

The committee moved KOSA's successor, a Youth AI Privacy Act and a Chatbot Act in its August 5 markup, with Cruz and Cantwell working the procedural votes — though the Screen Act stalled on attendance.

T
By Thomas Bradley Policy Correspondent
August 10, 2026 / Updated August 19, 2026 / 5 min read

The Senate Commerce Committee advanced five bills protecting children online during its August 5 markup, signaling the most significant congressional push on youth protection in years — and reviving the Kids Online Safety Act, which passed the Senate 91-3 in the prior Congress, in revised form. Committee Chair Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and ranking member Maria Cantwell (D-Washington) were the most active members on the procedural votes, according to Legis1's coverage of the session.

The Five Bills

The package spans distinct aspects of online youth safety: S.737, the Screen Act, would require websites to identify and block minors from explicit pornography — though it failed to advance at the markup due to insufficient senator attendance and requires a follow-up vote; S.1748, backed by 75 co-sponsors, addresses broader internet safety protections; S.4199, the Youth AI Privacy Act, requires safe-design features for AI chatbots available to minors; S.4407, the Chatbot Act, mandates family accounts and parental consent for teens, gives parents screen-time controls and requires AI companies to make reasonable efforts to prevent chatbots from presenting obscene material or facilitating suicidal ideation to minors; and S.5171 calls for a study of AI-enabled toys and a joint action plan on their marketing.

Momentum and Obstacles

The push follows a May parents' rally after which Cruz publicly promised the committee would act, and polls find nearly 90 percent public support for tech guardrails. The Supreme Court's decision upholding a similar Texas age verification law last year removed a major legal obstacle. But time is tight: few legislative days remain between August and November's midterm elections, and civil liberties groups including the Electronic Frontier Foundation have characterized the bills as censorious and privacy-invasive, arguing the duty-of-care provisions could violate First Amendment protections. The Screen Act's procedural setback shows floor passage is far from certain, observers note.

Tagged

Comments (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to share your thoughts.