HF4138 establishes a new set of rules for social media platforms that operate in Minnesota, with a particular focus on accounts used by children and minors. The bill expands existing transparency requirements by requiring platforms to publicly disclose how they limit excessive interactions, rank content algorithmically, measure user engagement, send notifications, and conduct product experiments, as well as to explain their age-estimation methods. These transparency provisions are scheduled to take effect July 1, 2027.
The bill also creates a new section of law titled “Stop Harms from Addictive Social Media,” which applies to covered platforms meeting certain size or revenue thresholds. It defines “addictive interface features” to include infinite scroll, autoplay video, push notifications, profile-based feeds, and engagement-based badges or metrics. For accounts identified as belonging to children age 15 or younger, platforms must estimate age using reasonable efforts, obtain verifiable parental consent to create or maintain the account, set privacy defaults to the most private settings, provide parental controls for time limits and access windows, and prohibit addictive interface features and targeted paid commercial advertising in the child’s feed.
The bill further requires platforms to terminate a child’s account upon request by the child or parent, and to terminate accounts when the platform concludes the user is a child unless parental consent is obtained. It also restricts how information collected for parental consent may be used, requires documentation of consent, and voids contracts formed in violation of the section, including arbitration and liability-limitation provisions. The law would apply to accounts created before, on, or after the effective date of July 1, 2027.
In terms of enforcement, the bill creates a private right of action for children and parents, allowing declaratory and injunctive relief, damages, attorney fees, and, for reckless or knowing violations, statutory damages of at least $10,000 and possible punitive damages. It also authorizes the attorney general to enforce violations as deceptive trade practices under Minnesota law. The bill would therefore add both regulatory obligations and litigation exposure for covered social media companies.
No committee transcript or vote record was provided, so there is no documented debate or recorded vote sentiment in the materials supplied. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears aimed at child online safety and platform accountability, with a strong consumer-protection orientation. Likely points of contention include the scope of age estimation, the feasibility and privacy implications of requiring platforms to infer users’ ages, the ban on certain design features and targeted ads for children, and the bill’s private-enforcement and contract-voiding provisions.
HF4138 amends Minnesota Statutes section 325M.33 and adds a new chapter 325M section imposing detailed obligations on covered social media platforms. It would require new transparency disclosures, mandate age-estimation and parental-consent procedures for child accounts, restrict addictive interface features and targeted advertising for children, and create enforcement through private lawsuits and attorney general action. The bill also affects contract law by voiding agreements made in violation of the section and limiting the enforceability of terms of service provisions such as arbitration clauses.
No committee discussion or vote history was provided, so there is no recorded legislative sentiment to summarize from the materials. From the bill’s structure and findings, the measure is clearly protective of children and families and is framed as a response to harmful social media design practices. The overall tone of the bill is regulatory and interventionist, suggesting support from child-safety advocates and likely concern from social media companies and free-speech or tech-policy critics.
The main likely points of contention are the bill’s broad definition of covered platforms, the requirement that platforms estimate users’ ages using available data, and the mandate to treat uncertain cases as children. Other disputed issues may include the prohibition on addictive interface features such as infinite scroll and autoplay, the ban on targeted paid advertising for child accounts, and the private right of action with statutory damages and punitive damages. Platforms may also object to the voiding of contracts and arbitration clauses, while supporters are likely to emphasize parental control, privacy, and protection from addictive design.