The Kids Off Social Media Act: Bipartisan Bait for a Digital ID Tyranny, By Chris Knight (Florida)

Here in the US, once hailed as the beacon of freedom, a quiet storm is brewing under the guise of child protection. The "Kids Off Social Media Act" (KOSMA), reintroduced in January 2025 as S.278, has garnered surprising bipartisan backing, with Republicans like Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL) joining Democrats such as Sen. Brian Schatz (D-HI) and Rep. Kim Schrier (D-WA) to push what sounds like a commonsense measure: keeping kids under 13 off social media and curbing addictive algorithms for teens under 17.

But peel back the layers, and this bill emerges as a potential gateway to mandatory digital surveillance, echoing the UK's slide into online speech policing where memes can land you in cuffs. This discussion explores the bill's mechanics, its hidden tyrannical potential, why even conservatives are on board, and the constitutional red flags waving from state-level failures — all while drawing parallels to Britain's free speech nightmare.

The Bill's Facade: Protecting Kids or Probing Adults?

At its core, KOSMA aims to address a real crisis: the mental health toll of social media on youth. Studies link excessive use to anxiety, depression, and worse, prompting the bill's prohibitions. Platforms like TikTok or Instagram couldn't let under-13s create accounts (aligning with COPPA, the existing federal law), and algorithmic feeds, those endless scrolls tailored to keep you hooked, would be banned for under-17s. Schools would limit social media access during class time, and the FTC would enforce it all, with states empowered to sue violators.

Sounds harmless? Not quite. The devil lurks in enforcement. How do platforms verify age without invasive checks? The bill doesn't mandate Digital ID outright, but critics warn it logically demands it. Kids (and savvy teens) lie about their age; robust compliance could require uploading government IDs, facial recognition scans, or device tracking — tools that don't vanish once implemented. As the ACLU notes, this could unconstitutionally restrict minors' access to information while burdening adults with privacy-eroding verification for every login.

Bipartisan support amplifies the concern. Republicans, traditionally wary of government overreach, are co-sponsoring amid parental outcry over Big Tech's harms. Cruz has championed it in the Senate Commerce Committee, framing it as curbing "addictive" tech. Yet, this aligns with broader pushes like the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), which passed the Senate 91-3 in 2024 but stalled in the House over censorship fears. KOSA, too, imposes "duty of care" on platforms to mitigate harms, potentially leading to over-moderation of content on topics like LGBTQ+ issues or abortion.

Why the GOP buy-in? Political calculus: Polls show overwhelming public support for kid protections, and with elections looming, it's low-hanging fruit. But as one analyst quipped, it's like handing the government a loaded gun—aimed at tech giants today, pointed at free speech tomorrow.

KOSMA isn't emerging in a vacuum. States have been testing grounds for similar laws, and the results? A constitutional bloodbath. At least eight states enacted minor social media restrictions in 2025, only to see them gutted in court. Arkansas and Ohio's bans were permanently blocked as First Amendment violations — content-based speech restrictions that don't survive scrutiny. Florida, Georgia, and California's measures faced temporary halts, with judges citing overbreadth and privacy intrusions.

Take Ohio: Its Parental Notification Act required consent for under-16s, but a federal judge struck it down in April 2025, affirming minors' speech rights. Texas's SCOPE Act, mandating content filtering for minors, saw parts enjoined for forcing platforms into unconstitutional moderation. Even Utah rebooted its law twice, only to face fresh lawsuits. The pattern? Age verification, via IDs or biometrics, chills adult speech, collects sensitive data, and burdens platforms into de facto censorship.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has been a bulldog here, filing briefs arguing these laws torch online anonymity and access. Supreme Court signals aren't encouraging either: In a 2025 concurrence, Justice Kavanaugh called Mississippi's verification law "likely unconstitutional." Yet federal lawmakers persist, perhaps betting on a more tech-sceptical judiciary post-2024's Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton ruling, which upheld age gates for adult content but left broader implications murky.

Echoes from Across the Pond: The UK's Cautionary Tale

If KOSMA passes, America risks mirroring the UK's descent into digital authoritarianism. Britain's 2023 Online Safety Act tasked Ofcom (its FCC equivalent) with forcing platforms to scrub "harmful" content, but enforcement has spiralled into a speech crackdown. Under pre-existing laws like the Communications Act 2003, police make over 30 arrests daily — 12,000+ annually — for "grossly offensive" online messages.

Real cases paint a grim picture: Comedian Graham Linehan arrested in September 2025 at Heathrow for tweets criticising trans policies, deemed "inciting violence." Army veteran Darren Brady detained in 2022 over a pride flag-swastika meme that "caused anxiety." Harry Miller's workplace visited for gender-critical posts, logged as a "non-crime hate incident." Even retweets or cartoons can trigger cuffs, with critics like Elon Musk blasting it as "real fascism."

Post-2024 riots, UK authorities threatened extraditing Americans for "stoking" unrest online, chilling global speech. The US State Department slammed Britain's "serious restrictions on freedom of expression" in its 2025 report. It started with "protecting kids" via age gates and content filters — sound familiar? — but evolved into elite "speech police" squads monitoring memes.

The Road to Tyranny: From Child Safety to Total Control

KOSMA's trajectory? Once age verification infrastructure exists, mission creep is inevitable. Platforms, fearing FTC fines, over-verify everyone. Data harvested could feed government databases, enabling tracking of "harmful" speech — dissent on politics, health, or culture. Republicans pushing this ignore how it empowers the very bureaucracies they decry, potentially backfiring under future administrations.

Alternatives exist: Parental controls, education, or targeting specific harms without blanket bans. But in a post-Section 230 reform era (with bills like Sunset Section 230 looming), KOSMA could accelerate liability-driven censorship.

https://www.vigilantfox.com/p/republicans-quietly-open-the-door