By MDBayNews Staff
Anthony Brown is urging Congress to pass the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), joining a coalition of state attorneys general who argue that Big Tech platforms are failing to adequately protect minors online.
Brown’s office released a statement this week calling on lawmakers to advance the bipartisan proposal, which would require social media companies and online platforms to take “reasonable measures” to prevent harms to children — including exposure to self-harm content, sexual exploitation, drug promotion, and other dangerous material.
On its face, the issue is not partisan. Parents across Maryland — from Baltimore County to the Eastern Shore — are worried about what their children are seeing online. The explosion of short-form video, algorithmic amplification, and anonymous messaging has changed childhood in ways policymakers are only beginning to understand.
But as Congress considers KOSA, the real question is not whether children deserve protection. They do. The question is whether this bill is the right tool — and whether it empowers families or expands government control over online speech.
What the Kids Online Safety Act Would Do
While the final language is still evolving, the bill would:
- Impose a “duty of care” on platforms toward minors
- Require platforms to mitigate certain harms to children
- Increase transparency about algorithms and content recommendation systems
- Strengthen parental controls and reporting mechanisms
- Allow enforcement by state attorneys general
That last point matters. If passed, Maryland’s Attorney General would gain expanded authority to bring actions against platforms operating in the state.
A Real Problem — With Real Constitutional Questions
There is little debate that social media has amplified harmful content. From eating disorder forums to dangerous viral “challenges,” parents often feel outmatched by trillion-dollar companies driven by engagement metrics.
But conservatives have learned to ask a second question: Who decides what counts as “harm”?
The phrase “reasonable measures to prevent harm” sounds straightforward — until enforcement begins. Does “harmful” include political content some bureaucrat disagrees with? Does it create pressure for platforms to over-censor speech to avoid liability?
The First Amendment concerns are not theoretical. Courts have already struck down overly broad state attempts to regulate online speech involving minors when they infringed on constitutional protections.
A poorly drafted federal law could invite similar litigation — or worse, create a chilling effect where platforms silence lawful speech simply to avoid lawsuits from activist attorneys general.
Maryland’s Track Record on Regulation
Maryland has not been shy about expanding regulatory authority in recent years. From data privacy laws to speech-related proposals, the General Assembly has increasingly stepped into digital policy areas.
The question for Maryland families is this:
Will KOSA empower parents — or empower government offices in Annapolis and Washington?
If enforcement becomes politically selective, trust erodes quickly. And in an era where Americans already distrust institutions, heavy-handed digital regulation could backfire.
What Parents Actually Want
Most Maryland parents aren’t asking for speech police. They want:
- Clear parental control tools
- Age-appropriate safeguards
- Transparency about what their kids are seeing
- Accountability when platforms knowingly push dangerous content
There is room for bipartisan reform here. But legislation must be narrowly tailored, clearly defined, and constitutionally sound.
Otherwise, Washington risks repeating a pattern: passing sweeping bills in response to real cultural anxieties — only to discover years later that the cure created new problems.
The Bottom Line
Attorney General Brown is right about one thing: protecting children online should be a national priority.
But Congress must ensure that the Kids Online Safety Act protects children without undermining free speech, federalism, or parental authority.
Maryland families deserve safety — and constitutional clarity.
Both matter.
Keep MDBayNews Reporting Free
MDBayNews exists to help Marylanders understand decisions made by state and local leaders — especially when those decisions affect daily life, rights, and public services.
If this article helped clarify what’s happening or why it matters, reader support makes it possible to keep publishing clear, independent reporting like this.
Have a tip or documents to share?
We review submissions carefully and confidentially. Anonymous tips are welcome when appropriate.
Discover more from Maryland Bay News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.