RESET Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Houchin, Erin [R-IN-9]
- Committees
- Energy and Commerce Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 1, 2026
Bottom line
The RESET Act aims to protect minors under 16 from social media exposure by banning their access to covered platforms, requiring data deletion, and establishing federal and state enforcement mechanisms.
What it actually does
This bill, known as the RESET Act, prohibits social media platforms that meet the definition of a 'covered platform' from allowing individuals under the age of 16 to create or maintain accounts. It mandates that platforms identify and terminate existing accounts of minors within 180 days of enactment, requiring the deletion of all personal data collected from these users, while also providing a 90-day window for minors to request a copy of their data. Enforcement authority is granted to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and State Attorneys General, and the bill preempts conflicting state or local laws.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that this bill is a crucial step to protect children from the documented harms of social media, including cyberbullying, exploitation, and negative impacts on mental health and development. They contend that platforms are not adequately safeguarding minors and that a clear age restriction is necessary to create a safer online environment, allowing children to develop offline without the pressures and risks associated with social media.
Opponents contend
Opponents contend that this bill infringes on parental rights to determine their children's online activities and raises significant free speech concerns for minors who use social media for educational, social, or advocacy purposes. They also highlight the practical challenges and privacy implications of implementing robust age verification systems, arguing that such measures could lead to platforms collecting more personal data or that minors will simply circumvent the rules, potentially moving to less regulated platforms.
The bill is short and relatively straightforward, making it accessible for a reader to evaluate its core provisions within a reasonable timeframe.
Section 2(a)(1)
Prohibition on Accounts for Minors
This provision makes it illegal for social media platforms, defined as 'covered platforms,' to allow any individual they know to be under the age of 16 to create or maintain an account or profile. The term 'knows' includes having actual knowledge or acting in willful disregard, meaning platforms cannot ignore clear signs of a user's age.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this directly addresses the harms of social media on young people by preventing their access to platforms designed for adults, thereby protecting their mental health and reducing exposure to inappropriate content and online exploitation.
Critics contend
Critics argue this provision restricts minors' freedom of expression and access to information, potentially hindering their social development and digital literacy. They also raise concerns about the feasibility and privacy implications of effective age verification.
Tradeoffs
This provision balances the desire to protect minors from online harms against concerns about restricting their autonomy, parental rights, and access to digital spaces for social connection and learning.
Section 2(a)(2)
Termination of Existing Minor Accounts
This section requires covered platforms to identify all existing accounts belonging to minors within 60 days of the bill's enactment. After identification, platforms must notify these users within 180 days that their accounts will be terminated. The actual termination of these accounts must occur within 30 days of that notification.
Section 2(a)(3)
Deletion and Access to Personal Data of Minors
Upon terminating a minor's account, covered platforms must immediately delete all personal data collected from or submitted by that user. However, for a period of 90 days following termination, the platform must allow the minor to request and receive a copy of their personal data in a readable, portable, structured, and machine-readable format. Platforms must fulfill such requests within 45 days.
Section 2(b)
FTC Enforcement Authority
Violations of this Act are to be treated as unfair or deceptive acts or practices under the Federal Trade Commission Act. This grants the FTC the full scope of its enforcement powers, including the ability to investigate, issue cease-and-desist orders, and impose civil penalties against covered platforms that fail to comply with the bill's requirements.
Section 2(c)
State Enforcement Actions
State Attorneys General, or other authorized state officials, are empowered to bring civil actions in state or federal court on behalf of their residents. These actions can seek injunctions, compliance enforcement, damages, restitution, or other relief for violations of the Act. States must notify the FTC before filing, and the FTC has the right to intervene. However, if the FTC or U.S. Attorney General has already filed a federal action, states are barred from bringing a parallel action against the same defendant for the same alleged violation.
Section 2(d)
Preemption of State and Local Laws
This section explicitly states that no state or political subdivision can create, maintain, or enforce any law, rule, regulation, requirement, standard, or other provision that has the force of law, if it relates to the provisions of this Act. This means the federal law establishes a uniform national standard for age restrictions on covered social media platforms, overriding any potentially conflicting or differing state or local regulations.
The definition of 'covered platform' refers to Section 4 of the TAKE IT DOWN Act (Public Law 119-12; 47 U.S.C. 223a note). This means the scope of which social media companies are subject to this bill is determined by another, external piece of legislation.
Section 2(f)(2)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative drafting practice to maintain consistency across related laws and avoid redundant text. However, it means a casual reader cannot fully grasp the bill's reach without looking up the referenced Act.
Case for: Using existing definitions promotes consistency across federal law and streamlines legislative drafting, ensuring that the term 'covered platform' has a well-established meaning.
Case against: It makes the bill less self-contained and requires additional research for readers to understand its full implications, potentially obscuring the true scope of affected entities.
Estimated impact: The scope of the bill's impact on the social media industry is entirely dependent on the definition in the TAKE IT DOWN Act, which generally targets platforms that host or distribute child sexual abuse material, but could be interpreted broadly to include many social media platforms.
The definition of 'know or knows' means 'to have actual knowledge or to have acted in willful disregard.' This is a critical standard for enforcement, as it defines the burden of proof for platforms regarding a user's age.
Section 2(f)(3)
Why it matters:While standard for legal definitions, placing this specific standard here means its implications for platform responsibility and age verification efforts might not be immediately apparent to a casual reader.
Case for: This definition provides a clear and actionable standard for platforms, preventing them from claiming ignorance if they deliberately avoid collecting or verifying age information. It sets a high bar for accountability.
Case against: Critics might argue that 'willful disregard' is still open to interpretation and could lead to legal challenges regarding what constitutes sufficient effort by platforms to ascertain age, potentially creating a loophole if platforms can demonstrate some effort, however minimal.
Estimated impact: This definition significantly influences the operational burden on platforms to implement age verification and monitoring systems, and directly affects the likelihood and success of enforcement actions.
The definition of 'personal data' refers to the meaning given to 'personal information' in Section 1302 of the Children's Online Privacy Protection Act of 1998 (15 U.S.C. 6501). This means the types of data that must be deleted or provided to minors upon request are defined by an existing, separate privacy law.
Section 2(f)(5)
Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for consistency and efficiency, leveraging an established definition from a foundational children's privacy law. However, it means the specific categories of data covered are not immediately clear from the bill text itself.
Case for: Leveraging the COPPA definition ensures consistency with existing children's privacy protections and provides a well-understood legal framework for what constitutes 'personal data' in this context.
Case against: It requires readers to consult an external statute to fully understand the scope of data deletion and portability requirements, potentially obscuring the full extent of privacy protections.
Estimated impact: The scope of data deletion and portability requirements for platforms is directly determined by the COPPA definition, which includes identifiers, contact information, geolocation data, photos, videos, and persistent identifiers.