California Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a sweeping package of laws Thursday aimed at protecting children from the risks of technology, including social media and AI chatbots.
The laws will penalize large social media companies up to $1 million per child if they are found negligent of harming children through their platforms, ban tech businesses from offering addictive feeds to anyone under 16, require operators of AI chatbots to perform risk assessments before rolling them out, and allow families to opt out of receiving school-issued laptops.
Newsom joined his wife and state lawmakers at a children’s museum near San Francisco to stress the importance of protecting kids at a time when they have such easy access to social media and AI chatbots.
“We have designed cribs to be safe, chairs to be safe, car seats,” Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan said. “Yet we’ve allowed technology to be handed to our children and never asked or expected it to be safe.”
Meta reached a settlement with California and 28 other states last month after they alleged in a 2023 lawsuit that the tech giant deliberately designed features to addict children. The company agreed to pay up to $18 billion and strengthen its child safety measures.
Other states have also pushed in recent years for better guardrails to protect children from the potential harms of social media.
Two years ago, New York state approved a law allowing parents to block their children from getting social media posts suggested by a platform’s algorithm, a move to limit feeds that critics argue are addictive. The policy is scheduled to go into effect early next year.
Newsom said the new California laws highlight the state’s leadership on the issue.
“It’s a good day for our children,” he said. “It’s a good day for the state of California.”
Jim Steyer, the founder of Common Sense Media, whose brother, Tom Steyer, ran for governor, said the laws were “the most important, comprehensive legislation” on the subject in the history of the United States.
But Meta raised concerns about some of the bills, saying the law to restrict addictive feeds hinders the company’s ability to bring enjoyable content to users on its platforms.
“We believe that delivering a tailored experience is an important part of what makes Facebook and Instagram valuable for teens as they connect with family and friends and explore their interests—safely,” spokesperson Jim Cullinan said in a statement. “Personalization is also how we deliver age-appropriate content for teens that is relevant to them—all with the proper guardrails in place.”
Newsom has walked a fine line on technology policy during his nearly eight years serving as governor in the nation’s most populous state, whose status as a global tech hub he has repeatedly touted in speeches.
He signed a law last year requiring platforms to remind users they are interacting with a chatbot and not a human. Hours later, he vetoed a bill that would have banned companies from making AI chatbots available to anyone under 18 years old unless the businesses could ensure the technology couldn’t engage in sexual conversations or encourage self-harm.
Newsom also signed a law in 2024 to restrict student use of smartphones in schools.
Maria Raine, a mother whose teenage son, Adam, died by suicide last year, said he died because he was “coached” by a chatbot. One of the laws Newsom signed, which requires chatbot operators to implement certain safety measures to protect children, was inspired by Adam’s story.
“Adam was an early adopter of AI, and so many of us parents did not understand the dangers back then,” Raine said at a news conference. “Now, we are all becoming more aware of the dangers of AI companionship and the need for our government to act to protect our children.”
Newsom also signed laws Wednesday, which are supported by Anthropic, that are aimed at improving oversight of AI companies. One of the measures requires the state to create rules for independent organizations to evaluate the safety risks of AI models, and the other requires the state to create a registry of AI auditors, who’d have to be financially independent from the businesses they are auditing.
