Pending Gov. Tim Walz’s signature, a new Minnesota law would require parental consent and ban “addictive” features for users 15-years-old and younger on TikTok, Instagram, Facebook, SnapChat and other social media platforms.
The bipartisan legislation would upend the state’s current regulatory landscape and add Minnesota to a growing list of states adding social media restrictions amid a lack of major federal action. In 2025 alone, lawmakers in 45 states and Puerto Rico introduced bills or resolutions related to social media and youth.
“I believe our kids that are under age 16 are developmentally unprepared for the addictive architecture of modern social media,” said Sen. Michael Kreun, R-Blaine and one of the bill’s authors, during an April 28 committee hearing.
First Amendment concerns have blocked the federal regulation of social media platforms, though lawmakers have raised plenty of such proposals.
One measure that has passed, the TAKE IT DOWN Act, sponsored by U.S. Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., criminalizes non-consensual intimate imagery, including those created with AI, and requires social media and similar websites to have procedures in place to remove such content within 48 hours of notice from a victim.
Related: Citing suicides, Minnesota lawmakers want to end minors’ access to AI companions
There are also federal regulations on how online platforms can collect, use and disclose the personal information of of children younger than 13.
The Minnesota legislation drew opposition from tech industry advocates, who said it could lead to litigation – as well as groups worried it could have unintended consequences on data privacy and kids’ wellbeing.
Here’s an overview of the state measures:
First: How would social media companies determine a user’s age?
The law requires large social media companies – those with 10,000 or more accounts – to estimate users’ age, then seek parental consent if it determines with enough confidence that a user is younger than 16.
Age estimation should be based on information collected “in the ordinary course of operation,” the law says – i.e., social media companies should not collect more data to determine someone’s age.
For “child” accounts, certain protections kick in.
First, the law bans “addictive” features on those accounts like infinite scrolling capabilities, autoplay videos, push notifications, personalized feeds and personal metrics that reward clicks or time spent using the account. It also bans targeted ads and the sale of personal user data, and requires child accounts to be set at the highest default privacy levels.
Required parental control features must allow someone to monitor the time spent on a child account, then set daily and weekly time limits, as well as times of day when the app can or can’t be used.
With some stipulations, the law also says courts can award damages – up to $10,000 for private suits – if it finds a social media company failed to comply.
Will the law stick?
Some states have been unable to enforce new social media regulations as a result of lawsuits brought by tech industry groups.
TechNet, an industry trade group, suggested that could happen in Minnesota.
“There are serious constitutionality issues that put the state at risk of costly litigation,” Ninia Linero, executive director for TechNet in the Midwest, told Minnesota lawmakers during an April committee hearing.
TechNet also opposed the bill on the grounds that its requirements for age verification and parental consent pose “privacy and data-governance concerns,” and said it would lead to private litigation costs by allowing someone to sue over noncompliance.
In response to a question from MinnPost, bill author Sen. Erin Maye Quade, DFL-Apple Valley, said “we feel confident that we learned from other states and crafted a law that will withstand legal scrutiny.”
The reason, she said: the bill is content-neutral, and the age-based restrictions and ban on addictive products is a “routine and expected role of the Minnesota legislature.”
“There is no constitutional or legal right for tech companies to access our children’s data or addict them to their products,” she said.
Committee hearings drew mixed support
Supporters of the bill testified about a myriad of harms caused by social media, especially to young people – cyber bullying, self esteem issues, overuse of the platforms and mental health issues, among other things.
Among the testifiers was Mike Roaldi, the parent of children who attend Annunciation Catholic School. He asked rhetorically how someone becomes capable of attacking children, like what happened at his kids’ school last year.
“The truth is, it often begins in a way that seems benign, with the child that’s alone on an online platform. That creates a pathway to violence,” Roaldi told lawmakers in April.
The testimony was not all positive.
Other commenters brought concerns about the bill’s unintended consequences, especially related to the age verification process. Some described it as creating a “fragmented system of surveillance,” or increased “behavioral profiling.”
Others shared concerns that the requirement for parental consent won’t impact all kids equally – especially LGBTQ+ kids who especially rely on online communities – and assumes they have a safe and supportive environment where they can get it.
Both the Minnesota Technology Association and the American Civil Liberties Union of Minnesota opposed the bill. One of the ACLU’s objections was that it is “constitutionally fragile” in light of legal challenges in other states.
How would this change Minnesota’s current laws?
Minnesota has a few legislative guardrails that apply to youth and social media, although the package awaiting Walz’s signature is by far the most restrictive.
Related: My generation is addicted to social media content
A law that went into effect last year sets protections for “kid-fluencers,” or minors who produce content for social media that makes a profit.
Another law, which will go into effect July 1 requires social media platforms to create mental health warning labels. In June 2025, Tech industry group NetChoice sued Attorney General Keith Ellison in response, alleging violations of the First Amendment.
This session, lawmakers passed a bill that bans artificial intelligence “nudification” technology, which allows someone to convert a non-explicit image of any person into a nude one. It goes into effect Aug. 1.
Washington correspondent Ana Radelat contributed to this report.
Related
