COPPA 2.0 sparks privacy debate: Balancing child safety and surveillance concerns
By willowt // 2025-06-29
Copy
 
  • COPPA 2.0 aims to expand data privacy protections for minors but risks invasive age-verification systems.
  • Utah App Store Law sets strict age checks, requiring parental consent for minors’ app downloads and purchases.
  • CPPA advances regulations to simplify consumer data deletion through a centralized platform.
  • Judicial pushes back: A California court blocked its Age-Appropriate Design Code due to First Amendment concerns.
  • Global scrutiny grows as the EU clarifies AI-data overlap, and the OECD proposes AI incident reporting standards.
A proposed update to online privacy laws, known as COPPA 2.0, has ignited a nationwide debate over protecting children’s digital rights versus the potential for widespread surveillance. The Senate bill, backed by bipartisan support, seeks to extend privacy protections to teens up to age 17 and streamline parental consent for data collection. Critics, however, warn that mandatory age-verifying systems could create intrusive data collection practices, disproportionately affecting all internet users. The Children and Teens’ Online Privacy Protection Act (S.836), sponsored by Senators Bill Cassidy (R-LA) and Edward Markey (D-MA), aims to curb targeted advertising and excessive data collection on minors. Yet, its requirement for platforms to assess user age through “objective circumstances” shifts liability, pressuring companies to adopt invasive tools like biometric scans or ID uploads. This unintended consequence has privacy advocates wary of a surveillance overreach.

Legislative shifts: Bipartisan support masks divisions over solutions

While COPPA 2.0 has drawn backing from lawmakers and tech firms, its language lacks clarity on enforcement, leaving platforms vulnerable to legal challenges unless they overcorrect with aggressive verification measures. The bill’s replacement of the “actual knowledge” standard with a negligence-based “objective circumstances” test leaves companies scrambling to preemptively identify underage users through behavioral tracking. Utah has already taken unilateral action with its App Store Accountability Act, requiring app stores to verify users’ ages and obtain parental consent for minors. By May 2026, platforms like Apple and Google must implement age-gating systems, link minor accounts to parental profiles and notify guardians of app content changes. Similar moves are under consideration in Virginia, where lawmakers advanced a law limiting minors’ social media use to one hour daily, though Governor Glenn Youngkin rejected it, advocating stricter content restrictions.

State laws and court battles highlight tensions

Judicial pushback has complicated state efforts to regulate tech. In California, tech group NetChoice won a second preliminary injunction against the Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, claiming its privacy mandates violated free speech rights. Meanwhile, courts weigh cases over corporate liability for data breaches. For example, a New York court ruled against insurer National General for exposing driver’s license numbers, fining it over breaches that went undetected for months. Legislators also prioritize judicial and consumer privacy. Michigan’s proposed bill, inspired by New Jersey’s Daniel’s Law, allows judges to request data deletion from public listings amid rising threats. Such measures reflect growing anxiety over data misuse, even as regulators like the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) advance tools like the Delete Act’s “DROP” platform, aiming to simplify consumer data deletion by 2026.

International perspectives: Aligning AI and privacy

The U.S. reforms echo global trends. The European Union’s AI Act faces GDPR conflicts, as EU lawmakers stress the need for clarity on handling sensitive data in automated systems. In China, new cybersecurity measures require financial institutions to report breaches and undergo compliance audits. Meanwhile, the OECD proposed standardized incident reporting for AI errors, emphasizing transparency to build public trust. The EU’s concerns resonate with critics arguing COPPA 2.0’s unclear standards could undermine privacy globally. Norway and Sweden, for instance, expressed vigilance over U.S. data transfers amid leadership shake-ups at the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board, a key U.S. watchdog.

A delicate balance between progress and privacy

As COPPA 2.0 and state laws redefine digital norms, stakeholders agree on one point: without comprehensive federal privacy legislation, piecemeal reforms risk unintended consequences like mass surveillance. While protecting minors is a priority, the absence of enforceable data retention limits and transparency measures leaves users vulnerable. The path forward requires balancing child safety with protections against overreach—a challenge lawmakers must confront to avoid sacrificing privacy in the name of progress. Sources for this article include: ReclaimTheNet.org NatLawReview.com
Copy