California lawmakers are moving closer to enacting some of the nation’s strictest regulations on youth social media usage, placing the state at the center of a nationwide debate over technology’s impact on adolescent mental health.

Led by Assemblymember Josh Lowenthal (D-Long Beach), the California Legislature is weighing a pair of high-profile bills, Assembly Bill 1709 and Assembly Bill 2, designed to curb social media platforms’ hold on users under 16.

The proposed legislation, which recently cleared the Senate Appropriations Committee, targets core engagement mechanics including recommendation algorithms, infinite scrolling, push notifications, and autoplaying videos.

Rather than imposing a blanket ban on platform access — an approach previously adopted by Australia — AB 1709 forces tech companies to alter their product design for minors. Under the proposed rules, platforms would be required to default younger users to safer configurations, such as chronological timelines stripped of algorithmically curated feeds. Complementing the push, AB 2 would establish legal recourse by allowing parents and minors to sue tech companies for civil penalties and damages if a child suffers harm related to platform usage.

“There’s really been a sea change that’s taking place over the last couple of years,” Lowenthal said, likening the regulations to mandatory helmet laws for children riding bicycles. “We’re speaking to a multitrillion-dollar sector that has grabbed onto our kids like a vice grip, and it’s too much.”

The legislative push arrives amid mounting pressure on Silicon Valley from both state legislatures and federal courts. More than 20 states have introduced or passed online youth safety measures, while California and dozens of other states are actively pursuing massive federal lawsuits accusing major tech corporations of designing inherently addictive platforms.

The movement enjoys broad public backing, with recent Pew Research Center data indicating majority support among Americans for strict youth social media limits. Youth advocacy groups like Design It For Us have also backed the amended approach, arguing that forcing structural changes to platform design is more effective than outright access bans, which teens frequently bypass.

However, the legislation faces significant headwinds from industry groups and civil liberties advocates.

NetChoice, a tech trade association representing industry giants like Meta Platforms Inc., Google, and TikTok, argues the restrictions infringe upon First Amendment rights and strip decision-making power from parents. Critics also point to potential unintended consequences, noting that strict access barriers or altered platforms could inadvertently isolate neurodivergent and LGBTQ+ youth who rely on online communities for support.

Despite these concerns, supporters remain confident as the legislation approaches final floor votes. Democratic California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has voiced support for curbing youth social media access, is expected to sign the measures into law if they reach his desk. If passed, the legislation is widely expected to trigger immediate legal challenges from the tech sector, serving as a landmark test for online youth safety laws across the country.