Why California must keep children 16 and under off addictive social media platforms

But the danger that took my son didn’t come from the outside world I understood. It came through an app, a system designed to connect instantly, privately and without friction, a system I could neither see nor control. 

Through Snapchat, a drug dealer reached out to Sammy and delivered a counterfeit drug to our home, like a pizza, after we were asleep. It contained a lethal dose of fentanyl. 

Every day in California, families are confronting a dangerous reality. Social media platforms are placing powerful, rapid and often anonymous communication tools directly into the hands of young teenagers. 

While those tools can be used for connection, they can also expose kids to risks they are not developmentally ready to navigate.

Lawmakers are considering a bill that would prohibit children under 16 from creating or maintaining accounts on social media platforms with addictive features. Assembly Bill 1709, authored by Assemblymember Josh Lowenthal, would require platforms, rather than parents, to enforce that rule.

AB 1709 is a measured step, not a radical one. It reflects what many parents have come to understand: The current system isn’t working.

It does not cut children off from the internet. It does not block access to information. It simply delays participation in highly personalized, addictive, account-based social media ecosystems until age 16. 

California already recognizes that some products require safeguards. We regulate driving, alcohol, gambling and firearms because we understand certain risks demand clear boundaries for developing minds. 

Social media now falls into that category.

Families have been told for years that social media harms can be managed through better settings, smarter algorithms or increased parental vigilance. But social platforms built around private messaging, algorithmic amplification and rapid connections with strangers routinely outpace those protections. 

Parents cannot supervise systems that are engineered to limit supervision. These platforms are optimized for engagement — keeping young users online for as long as possible — not for safety.

For too long parents have relied on tech companies’ promises, which haven’t matched results. The evidence of harm to young users — in terms of mental health, exposure to dangerous content and vulnerability to exploitation — is no longer theoretical.

The U.S. Surgeon General reported that youth spending more than three hours a day on social media face roughly double the risk of depression and anxiety symptoms. 

One study followed 1,200 children for a decade and found that two hours or more of social media use a day was linked to increased depressive symptoms and poorer wellbeing a year later. A 2024 analysis of 45 studies involving 153,000 adolescents found statistically significant associations between social media use and depression, anxiety, loneliness and lower self-esteem.

AB 1709 is about prevention. It does not criminalize teens or fine their parents. It puts responsibility where it belongs: on the companies that design and profit from these platforms.

The bill also acknowledges that technology evolves. It includes oversight mechanisms to ensure the law can adapt as platforms change, which was lacking in prior efforts to address online harms.

California has often led the nation in consumer protection and child safety. AB 1709 is an opportunity to lead again, not by limiting innovation, but by acknowledging that some boundaries are necessary.

Children’s wellbeing should not depend on whether companies choose to act. It should be built into the rules we set. AB 1709 finally draws that line.

Samuel Chapman is the CEO of Parent Collective Inc., which advocates for social media safety for children and fentanyl crisis education and activism.