While California Democrats ‘ new voting record suggests that Newsom or his party prioritizes protecting children, Governor Gavin Newsom touts his new social media legislation as a landmark achievement for protecting children online.  ,  ,
Senate Bill 976 ( introduced by Democrat Nancy Skinner ), which Newsom signed into law last month, bans online platforms from “knowingly providing” addictive content feeds to minors “without parental consent”. In a , statement , accompanying the act filing, Newsom bragged,” With this act, California is helping protect children and teenagers from actively designed functions that serve these destructive habits. I thank Senator Skinner for advancing this important legislation that puts children’s well-being first” . ,
Despite Newsom’s support of the expenses receiving media attention, the Democrat bulk has refused to take into account various other child protection ideas this congressional session and also pushed through one bill that puts several young people at risk. The group has certainly earned its speech as a hero of children’s well-being.
SB 1435, which was introduced by Republican Ochoa Bogh, is a renowned example, which argued that California law should be applied to national broadcasting standards in order to support the removal of vulgar materials from K-8 classrooms and college libraries. This innocent act to make education settings safer for younger individuals failed to pass the Senate Education Committee. Three Democrat senators , opposed , the estimate, dismissing it as a “book-banning” costs.
However, if materials are deemed unsuitable for children’s use in K-8 academic settings in accordance with federal broadcasting regulations, it makes sense that they should be as well. Another bill,  , AB 3080 ( introduced by Republican Juan Alanis ),  , proposed to strengthen online protections for children by requiring businesses that offer products or services that are illegal for minors, such as pornography, to verify users ‘ age with government-issued ID.
The Senate Appropriations Committee, headed by Democrat Sen. Anna Caballero, successfully ended the costs by putting it on the agency’s tension report despite passing it by unanimous vote in the Assembly and facing no criticism in the Senate Judiciary Committee.  ,
Democrats ‘ biggest hypocrisy, by far, is claiming to worry about “parental acceptance” when it comes to web content because they work overtime to sabotage local school board parental notification laws. A growing number of relatives reported that their children were being defrauded at school by changing their children’s titles and genders.
One particularly egregious example occurred in the Newport-Mesa school district in Orange County, where last year a parental rights group “obtained hundreds of pages of emails and documents” showing that the district was involved in the , social gender” transitioning”  , of 23 students — “eight of them elementary school age” — without informed parental consent from 2020 to 2022.  ,
Over a hundred California college districts passed laws mandating schools to remind kids of any changes to their child’s standard or illegal data in response to situations like these. California Attorney General Rob Bonta has targeted university towns that adopted these laws, most notably suing , Chino Valley Unified , for implementing the second parental notification plan. This problem is still being litigated in a number of cases, both in state and federal court.
Rather than waiting for ongoing litigation to resolve, Democrats in the legislature pushed through , AB 1955 ( introduced by Democrat Chris Ward ), which bans districts from adopting parental notification policies, and ostensibly allows school districts to create and maintain separate — , and often secret — , files or “unofficial records” for students, intentionally concealing information from parents.  ,
However, AB 1955 defies federal legislation that demands that kids always have full access to their children’s school information. Before the new law goes into effect in January, legal challenges are anticipated to be raised by the new rules.
How does Democrats support parental participation in online communities but criticize it when it comes to things as transformative as sex” transitioning”?
Will O’Neill, president of Newport Beach,  , captured , the irony of the Democrats ‘ approach completely:” In other words ,]Attorney General Rob Bonta ] wants a kid to get individual consent before joining Instagram, but not before changing gender”.
Californian voters should be aware of the disconnect between the Democrats ‘ rhetoric and their actions regarding child protection under the new social media law. They want to be seen as fervent leaders of children’s health. However, even the slightest glance can cause this photograph to crumble.
Andrew Davenport contributes to Young Voices and serves as a policy and research connect with the California Policy Center.
