Trade: business practices; parental consent for social media use; require. Creates new act.
SB 190 would create the “Social Media Children Protection Act” and impose age-verification and parental-consent requirements on social media companies for Michigan residents under age 16. Beginning June 30, 2026, platforms would have to verify the age of new applicants and, if the applicant is a minor, obtain express parental consent before allowing the account to be created. The bill also applies to existing accounts: on a minor’s first attempt to access an existing account after that date, the company would have 14 days to verify age and parental consent or block access, except to allow the user to delete the account.
The bill further requires social media companies to give parents tools to supervise a minor’s account, including the ability to view privacy settings, set daily time limits, and block access during certain times. It also bars companies and third parties from retaining personal identifying information used for age or consent verification, and it authorizes the attorney general to investigate alleged violations and bring civil actions seeking fines and attorney fees. Contract terms that waive or limit the act’s protections, or restrict cooperation with law enforcement, would be void and unenforceable.
If enacted, SB 190 would add a new chapter of state law regulating social media account access by minors and would directly impose compliance duties on social media companies operating in Michigan. It would create a statutory definition framework for social media platforms, minors, parents, and related terms, while excluding broadband internet access, email, and certain preselected-content services. The bill would also create enforcement authority for the attorney general and establish civil penalties of up to $1,000 per violation, or up to $25,000 per violation for persistent and knowing violations, along with attorney fees and costs.
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the measure appears to be framed as a child-protection and parental-control proposal rather than a partisan or procedural bill. Its stated purpose and structure suggest support for stronger safeguards around minors’ use of social media, especially through age checks, consent, and parental supervision tools. At the same time, the bill’s compliance burdens and privacy-related requirements indicate that it would likely draw scrutiny from platforms and civil-liberties or tech-policy stakeholders if debated publicly.
The main points of contention are likely to be the age-verification mandate, the requirement to obtain and manage parental consent, and the operational burden placed on social media companies to police both new and existing accounts. Privacy concerns may arise from the need to collect and then not retain personal identifying information used for verification, while enforcement concerns may focus on attorney general oversight and the size of the civil penalties. Another likely issue is the scope of the bill’s definitions, including which online services count as social media platforms and which are excluded, since that determines how broadly the law would apply.