(The Center Square) – Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz signed the last bills of the legislative session recently, less than two weeks after it officially ended.
Those bills include everything from a human services omnibus bill to fraud mitigation and cannabis legislation.
One of the most notable bills Walz signed was HF 4138, which amended the “Stop Harms From Addictive Social Media” act.
Under its provisions, social media companies operating in Minnesota must ensure they obtain “verifiable parental consent” for children under 16 looking to make a social media account.
Walz applauded this requirement.
“As social media becomes more advanced, we need to make sure our families don’t fall victim to the powerful companies that use kids as a testing ground to make algorithms more addictive,” he said. “Privacy and safety have to come first. This bill puts families back in the driver’s seat and makes sure technology works for our kids, not the other way around.”
The bill also requires privacy settings be the “most private” and avoid “addictive interface features” and “targeted paid commercial advertising.”
“Addictive interface features” include infinite scrolling, auto playing videos, push notifications, etc.
“SHASM is an important step forward in protecting Minnesota children and families by addressing the environment and influences that can contribute to harm, including online spaces,” said the Annunciation Light Alliance, a nonpartisan, parent-led advocacy group. “We are grateful to Governor Walz, bipartisan legislators, parents, students, and advocates who moved SHASM forward with courage and compassion, and we remain committed to working with Minnesota leaders on evidence-based solutions that help keep children safe at school, at home, in our communities, and online.”
The internet trade group NetChoice testified against the bill.
“The bill would compromise the data security of Minnesota families, restrict constitutionally protected speech and editorial judgment, and unleash a wave of litigation that would harm rather than help the children it claims to protect,” Amy Bos, NetChoice’s vice president of government affairs, said in a letter.
The attorney general has oversight over the social media companies’ compliance with the regulations, meaning there could be legal action for a failure to comply. Parents and children are also granted a “private right of action,” something NetChoice’s testimony was particularly concerned about.
“The legislature should, at minimum, strip the private right of action from this bill and rely instead on targeted, consistent, and expert-informed enforcement by the attorney general,” Bos said.
This legislation is set to take effect July 1, 2027, but applies to all accounts — no matter when they were made.
“In Minnesota, we’re not letting powerful companies use kids as a testing ground to make algorithms more addictive,” Walz posted to X following the bill’s signing.
This is not the only action the Minnesota legislature has taken to address social media and minors.
As exclusively reported on by The Center Square in April, the state is also facing a lawsuit for a new law requiring websites to display warnings about social media use.
NetChoice argues in NetChoice v. Ellison that this law is a government attack on free speech and has asked the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota to declare the requirement unlawful.
The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota, targets a provision of House File 2 set to take effect July 1.
According to the lawsuit, the law would require a broad range of platforms to display a “state-authored warning” to every user “every single time they access the site,” regardless of age.
“Websites would have to adopt the message as their own and display it to all users—minors and adults—any time the user visits the site,” Paul Taske, co-director of the NetChoice Litigation Center, told The Center Square.
Advocates for the legislation say these mental health warning labels are important to protect Minnesotans.
“I think the evidence is very clear that social media use is linked with depression, anxiety, loneliness, self harm, suicidal ideation, eating disorders, all sorts of terrible mental health conditions,” said Rep. Zack Stephenson, DFL-Coon Rapids and one of the sponsors of the bill, last July.
But NetChoice argues that, despite lawmakers citing mental health concerns, the U.S. Constitution limits how the state can respond to those concerns.
“The First Amendment isn’t just for the speech that everyone agrees with,” Taske said. “It’s for the unpopular speaker, publisher, and website. Otherwise, the government could label anything it dislikes as ‘harmful’ and force you to adopt its talking point.”
