The KIDS Act is way worse than digital carding — it is a mass surveillance system

The Kids Internet and Digital Safety (KIDS) Act, which recently passed the House and is under Senate consideration, is criticized for creating a broad surveillance and censorship regime online. Although promoted as a measure to protect children from harmful internet content, the bill would require platforms to implement age verification systems that link users’ offline identities to their online activity. This mandate could apply to all users, including adults, effectively establishing a mass surveillance framework that undermines current online privacy norms. The bill provides for legal enforcement by the Federal Trade Commission and state attorneys general, pressuring platforms to age-gate content or services to avoid liability.

Key sections of the bill, such as those in the SAFE BOTS Act and SCREEN Act, compel platforms to identify and restrict underage users from accessing certain types of content. Because platforms bear legal responsibility for blocking youth access, they are likely to implement age verification systems affecting the entire user base. This approach risks over-moderation, potentially censoring lawful speech, including sensitive but legally protected discussions on topics like substance use, which the bill broadly categorizes as harmful. Critics argue that past experiences show platforms tend to over-remove content under legal threat, harming free expression.

Furthermore, the Act introduces new rules affecting encrypted and ephemeral messaging services, aiming to limit minors’ exposure to harmful content. Although the bill states it does not intend to override strong encryption, its enforcement provisions create pressure to weaken or restrict encrypted or disappearing messages, which are vital privacy tools. This tension between privacy technologies and legal mandates raises concerns that the protection clause around encryption might be ineffective in practice.

The critique emphasizes that there are alternative ways to protect young internet users that do not infringe on the privacy of all users by requiring personal data collection or enabling broad censorship. Instead, advocates suggest the need for comprehensive federal data privacy legislation to empower users over their data and platform algorithms. The author warns that the KIDS Act sacrifices privacy and free expression rights across the internet under the premise of protecting children, and encourages public opposition to the bill as it proceeds through Congress.