Summary of "Meta Spent Millions To Push The New Age Check Laws"

Overview

This summarizes a video alleging that Meta is lobbying heavily for state and federal “App Store Accountability” laws that would shift responsibility for age verification — and legal liability for underage users — from app developers (like Meta) to operating-system and app-store providers (Apple, Google, Microsoft, etc.). The speaker argues this is a deliberate strategy to avoid enforcement and COPPA fines while continuing to profit from underage users.

Main claim: Meta is spending heavily to rewrite responsibility for underage users onto app-store and OS providers so Meta can avoid enforcement and liability.

Lobbying and money

Meta reportedly spent $26.3 million on U.S. lobbying in 2025 and employed 89 lobbyists.
The company allegedly used more than 40 outside lobbying firms and deployed 12 lobbyists in Louisiana alone.
Meta is said to have funneled over $70 million to state-level super PACs and advocacy groups (example cited: Digital Childhood Alliance).
The speaker claims Meta wrote legislative language for state legislators and actively pushed bills nationwide.

Legal background and risk to Meta

COPPA (Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, 1998) protects children under 13. Fines are noted as up to about $53,088 per violation.
The speaker argues Meta faces the largest COPPA exposure because of many under-13 users on Instagram.
A lawsuit by 33 state attorneys general is cited, alleging:
- Meta received 1.1 million reports of Instagram users under 13 since 2019.
- Meta conducted targeted advertising toward those accounts (example: sending makeup ads to young girls exhibiting certain behaviors).
The speaker estimates potential COPPA liability could reach tens of billions for Instagram violations.

How the proposed laws would work

Federal App Store Accountability Act (section 8) — as explained in the video:
- Would shield app developers from liability if they relied in good faith on age-verification data or an age-signal from a “covered app store provider,” complied with specified requirements, and followed industry or commission-identified standards.
Practical implementation described:
- Devices would collect an age-bracket at setup; that flag would be sent to apps in the background to gate content.
- If apps rely on that flag, the legal burden shifts to the app store/OS provider.
Current drafts:
- Do not explicitly require photo ID uploads or face scans; they rely on users declaring age brackets.
- The speaker warns future versions might require more invasive verification — and that app stores, not Meta, would then collect and secure such data.

State and federal actions (examples cited)

Louisiana HB570 — passed overwhelmingly; effective July 1.
Utah SB142 — enacted May 1, 2025.
California AB1043 — passed; effective 2027.
Colorado SB 26-051 — passed Senate.
Texas SB2420 — signed then struck down by a federal judge on First Amendment grounds.
Pending bills in New York and Illinois.
Pending federal measures include the Kids Online Safety Act and App Store Accountability bills.

Additional criticisms and context

The speaker accuses Meta of trying to avoid accountability for exploiting children online and of using money and lobbying to shift responsibility onto others.
The video claims Meta is removing the end-to-end encryption option from Instagram direct messages, arguing this undermines user privacy.
The issue is framed as a money-and-influence battle between Big Tech firms (Meta versus Apple/Google/etc.), with extensive lobbying on both sides.
The video urges viewers to contact their representatives to oppose these bills and includes a sales plug for the presenter’s online store and a Monero payment discount.

Presenters and parties mentioned

Video narrator / presenter: unnamed (video creator).
Other parties mentioned:
- Meta (subject)
- 33 state attorneys general (plaintiffs in cited lawsuit)
- Advocacy groups such as the Digital Childhood Alliance
- Platform/OS providers Apple and Google