California: the features under scrutiny
The debate over social media and minors is increasingly focusing on the features that keep users engaged, not just the minimum age for opening an account. In California, Assembly Bill 1709, signed by Governor Gavin Newsom on September 10, 2026, and backed by Common Sense Media, prohibits from January 1, 2027, offering under-16s features deemed to be a source of addiction. The final text singles out personalized feeds based on user data and automatic video playback, leaving the attorney general the option to add others by regulation; Assemblymember Josh Lowenthal also cited infinite scrolling and notifications. The law does not prohibit teenagers from having accounts and provides for fines of up to $50,000 per minor in cases of knowing violation, enforceable only by public prosecutors.
To identify minors, the rule relies on the Digital Age Assurance Act: from January 1, 2027, Apple, Google and Microsoft will collect age at device setup and transmit a signal to apps, without documents uploaded app by app.
The platforms' lawsuit
On November 4, Meta, Google and TikTok asked three federal courts—in San Francisco, San Jose and Los Angeles, respectively—to block the law; the defendant is Attorney General Rob Bonta. The companies invoke the First Amendment, arguing that ordering and displaying content is a protected editorial choice, Section 230 on platform liability, and parental freedom, which the state would end up replacing. Google noted that on YouTube autoplay is already disabled for minors and that parents can turn off the Shorts feed. Lowenthal responds that the law does not touch content and that certain public health reasons outweigh family choices, comparing them to helmet and child car seat requirements; according to him, the litigation also serves to buy time.
Australia and Europe: from bans to design
Australia offers the first testing ground for the age ban: since December 10, 2025, platforms must take reasonable measures to prevent under-16s from opening or maintaining an account. A University of Newcastle study published in June in the British Medical Journal, based on 408 young people interviewed before the ban and three months later, finds that about 85% of under-16s continued to use the banned platforms and that nearly one in five had opened a fake account. The government attributes the problem to the platforms and has strengthened the powers of the eSafety Commissioner, with fines of up to AUD 99 million; on October 28, the House approved a Digital Duty of Care Bill now before the Senate.
In Europe, the Digital Services Act already imposes high levels of privacy and safety for minors, and the Commission is using it against the features California wants to switch off: on February 6, 2026, it preliminarily concluded that TikTok's design violates the regulation through infinite scrolling, autoplay, push notifications and personalized recommendation, and in April it challenged Facebook and Instagram for failing to prevent access by under-13s. The EU KIDS Act proposal of September 17 combines age thresholds and design rules: no social media under age 13 except for parent-managed services, independent accounts from age 15, a ban on features that create addiction for all minors, mandatory age verification and a reversal of the burden of proof for large platforms.
