Maryland Kids Code, a bill that will require social media companies to do more to safeguard kids, will be signed into law by Gov. Wes Moore (D) on Thursday in Annapolis.
The legislation was sponsored in the Maryland General Assembly by Del. Jared Solomon (D-Dist. 18), who represents Chevy Chase and Kensington, and Sen. Ben Kramer (D-Dist. 19), who represents Silver Spring.
“It’s meant to rein in some of the worst practices with sensible regulation that allows companies to do what’s right and what is wonderful about the internet and tech innovation, while at the same time saying, ‘You can’t take advantage of our kids,’” Solomon said during a virtual press conference Wednesday.
The legislation mirrors a child internet safety bill signed into law in California in 2022 that was modeled after landmark laws in the United Kingdom. known as the Age Appropriate Design Code.
The primary focus of the bill is to protect children’s privacy and prevent children from being inundated with harmful or inappropriate content that they weren’t looking for. This could result in tech platforms limiting autoplay videos for children, as YouTube has in the U.K. Another example is requiring new social media accounts to be set as private as a default. It would also implement strategies to prevent anonymous adults from contacting children online.
Solomon explained in an April 8 interview at the General Assembly in Annapolis that there are two main pieces to the legislation with different start dates.
Once Moore signs the bill into law, one piece will go into effect Oct. 1. This part of the law says that internet companies “can no longer harvest the data, they can’t post location information, they can no longer use dark algorithms” when it comes to kids, Solomon said.
The other piece of the legislation will go into effect in 2025.
“It will be sort of an entire new framework for the way in which companies are supposed to look at their products,” Solomon said. “That’s through the use of data protection impact assessments, which will really require them to analyze their products for the potential harm that they might cause to young people. When weighing those harms, the harms have to weigh more than the potential profit.”
Kramer said the legislation was needed to prevent big tech companies from taking advantage of kids, and that the government had to get involved.
“The bottom line is big tech has been preying on and victimizing our children for way, way too long,” Kramer said.
Del. C.T. Wilson (D-Dist. 28), who represents Charles County and chairs the House of Delegates Economic Matters Committee, said there is no existing law that protects children online, which is why he supported the legislation.
“Right now, they can do the geolocating, they can track your children right now. They can harvest your children’s data right now, they can sell that data right now,” Wilson said. “There’s no real way to stop adults from accessing youth websites, having interactions with children.”
Solomon introduced the legislation in 2023, but it didn’t get past the committee stage. In an interview with MoCo360 on opening day of the 2024 General Assembly session on Jan. 10, Solomon said he learned from lawsuits involving the California law and so reworked the language in the new version of his bill to make it stronger and more likely to pass.
While digital gaming platform Roblox put full-throated support behind the similar California law, not all tech industry groups are on board with this type of legislation. NetChoice, a trade group that counts Google, Meta and Amazon as members, sued to block California’s version of the age-appropriate design code law.
It argues that the law violates companies’ constitutional right to make “editorial decisions” about how they moderate content.
The California law received an injunction in March, with a judge ruling it could violate the First Amendment. However, California’s state attorney general has continually defended the law.
Solomon told MoCo360 in the April 8 interview that he will not be surprised if the legislation faces legal challenges.
“In regards particularly to the lawsuit in California, we tried to make our bill stronger to allow it to pass constitutional muster in federal court, because more than likely, opponents are going to try to litigate this,” Solomon said.
Meetali Jain, director of the Tech Justice Law Project, said during Wednesday’s press conference that the legislation “uses a constitutional scalpel, not a blunt ax” to avoid violating the First Amendment.
“The framework isn’t about policing content,” Jain said. “… The code [is tied] to a long tradition in Maryland of enforcing consumer protection laws to protect its residents, recognizing that kids are a critical consumer base for these platforms.”