By Wyatt Young Nelson
Although protecting children online is an important public policy goal, expanding government- or company-controlled age verification systems should not come at the expense of privacy, anonymity, and civil liberties. Measures intended to improve online safety deserve careful consideration, but they should not create systems that collect sensitive personal information, increase surveillance, or weaken constitutional protections for free expression and privacy.
A bill recently introduced in Congress, H.R. 7757, commonly referred to by supporters through names including the Kids Internet Digital Safety Act (KIDS Act), the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), or the Parents Decide Act, has raised concerns among privacy advocates because of its potential implications for online age verification. Like any federal legislation, the bill must move through the committee process before receiving consideration by the full Senate. Supporters argue that such legislation is intended to protect minors online, while critics contend that it could establish new mechanisms for collecting personal information and monitoring internet users.
Justice Louis Brandeis described privacy as “the right to be let alone,” a principle that many privacy advocates argue remains relevant in the digital age. Online age verification systems often require individuals to upload government-issued identification or submit facial scans or selfies to verify their age before accessing websites, applications, or online services. Unlike showing identification to a store clerk when purchasing alcohol, digital verification often involves transmitting personal information to third-party servers where it may be stored, processed, or retained. The privacy risks associated with centralized databases of sensitive personal information have become a major point of debate.
Civil liberties organizations like the Electronic Frontier Foundation, have expressed concerns about these systems, arguing that mandatory age verification can undermine anonymous speech and expose users to unnecessary privacy risks.
Privacy advocates also argue that online anonymity serves important purposes beyond convenience. Journalists, whistleblowers, researchers, political dissidents, domestic violence survivors, and ordinary citizens often rely on anonymous access to information without fear of government monitoring or corporate profiling. Critics argue that mandatory digital identification could make anonymous participation on the internet significantly more difficult.
Another concern involves data security. Collecting copies of identification documents or biometric information creates valuable targets for cybercriminals. History has demonstrated that even large corporations and government agencies are vulnerable to data breaches. If age verification databases were compromised, individuals could face identity theft, fraud, or other forms of misuse involving highly sensitive personal information.
Many critics also question whether mandatory online identification is the only effective way to protect children. Parents already have access to a wide range of parental control tools, including device-level restrictions, family account settings, and DNS filtering services such as CleanBrowsing and OpenDNS FamilyShield. These technologies allow parents to limit access to adult or violent content without requiring every internet user to surrender personal identifying information.
The debate over age verification intensified following the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton. The Court upheld a Texas law requiring age verification for certain online content, with the majority concluding that such requirements could be constitutionally permissible. Privacy advocates disagree with that conclusion, arguing that digital age verification differs fundamentally from briefly presenting identification during an in-person purchase because online systems may involve creating permanent digital records that can be stored or analyzed.
The broader concern extends beyond a single bill or court decision. Privacy advocates argue that expanding digital identity requirements could gradually normalize greater surveillance by both governments and private companies. They fear that information collected for age verification today could eventually be used for advertising, profiling, or other purposes unrelated to child safety. As George Orwell famously wrote in 1984, “Big Brother is watching you”— a phrase that continues to symbolize concerns about expanding surveillance in modern society.
This debate should not be viewed as a partisan issue. Privacy, transparency, freedom of expression, and public trust affect Americans regardless of political affiliation. Protecting children online is a worthy objective, but policymakers should pursue solutions that preserve both safety and fundamental civil liberties. Laws designed to safeguard minors should not unnecessarily erode privacy or create permanent systems for tracking the online activities of law-abiding citizens.
For these reasons, Alaskans concerned about digital privacy should carefully examine legislation involving online age verification and encourage their U.S. senators to support approaches that protect children without sacrificing anonymity, free expression, and the privacy rights of all Americans.
Learn about the Parents Over Platforms Act, co-sponsored by Senator Dan Sullivan, that seeks to protect kids from predatory tech while also protecting privacy rights:
Wyatt Young Nelson has lived in both Nome and Anchorage, graduated from Bartlett High School, and attended the ACE/ACT program. He was named after the famous Wyatt Earp and his middle name Young is from his grandfather the late Congressman Don Young. He has been involved in both the 2024 and 2026 efforts to repeal ranked-choice voting.
