California’s new law aims to limit design features like infinite scroll and autoplay on social platforms for users under 16, representing a significant stride in safeguarding children’s digital wellbeing amidst industry resistance.
California is preparing to enforce one of its most ambitious attempts yet to curb the pull of social media on children, with a law due to take effect in January that will bar platforms from serving users under 16 the kinds of features designed to keep them online for longer. The measure targets tools such as infinite scroll, autoplay and algorithmic recommendation feeds, and was signed by Governor Gavin Newsom on 10 September 2026 alongside a broader package of child-safety rules covering AI chatbots. TechSpot and the California governor’s office both described the package as a major new test of how far states can go in regulating digital products aimed at minors.
At the centre of the legislation is the idea that children may still use social media, but without the design elements lawmakers believe can encourage compulsive behaviour. California Assembly Bill 1709, as described by legal commentary and state materials, allows under-16 users to keep accounts so long as the addictive functions are switched off. A companion measure, Senate Bill 976, also requires platforms to seek verifiable parental consent before offering addictive feeds and related features to minors, with the attorney general tasked with drawing up age-assurance and consent rules by 1 January 2027.
Democratic Assemblyman Josh Lowenthal, who authored the law, and Republican Assemblyman Joe Patterson, who supported it, explained on California Politics 360 that the goal is not to block access to social media altogether. Rather, they said, it is to remove the mechanisms that keep children scrolling, watching and returning to apps for extended periods. Lowenthal said the e-Safety Commission will work with paediatric, scientific and educational experts as the law develops, while Patterson argued that the measure simply strips away the most addictive elements.
Enforcement could become the law’s most contested issue. Lowenthal has acknowledged that platforms may challenge the rules in court, and reporting on the legislation suggests the state is preparing for legal and technical pushback from companies that have long resisted limits on product design. The law’s companion penalty provisions are severe: according to the lawmakers, companies that are found to have caused harm may face damages of up to $1 million per child, or treble damages where higher. That liability framework is intended to push firms towards compliance, not merely disclosure.
The legislation also tries to avoid a familiar privacy dilemma. Rather than forcing children to hand over government identity documents in most cases, it relies on existing California law to support device-level age verification while keeping the process as privacy-preserving as possible. Lowenthal said the aim is to create a robust system without normalising routine ID checks. Supporters say that balance matters because the law is meant to protect children without creating a new data-collection problem.
The broader political context is as important as the mechanics. California’s move is part of a wider effort to address the risks of youth-facing digital products, including AI chatbots, before federal rules arrive. Newsom’s office presented the September package as a landmark child-safety effort, and supporters from both parties cast the legislation as a practical response to technology that has moved faster than regulators. Patterson said the bill reflected input from across the political spectrum, while Lowenthal said the state must step in where Washington has not.
Disclaimer: This content is intended for informational purposes only. Readers are advised to exercise their own judgement, conduct due diligence, or consult a qualified expert before acting on any information provided.
