The Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) has voiced its concerns to Vermont lawmakers regarding the Vermont Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (VAADC), a bill identified as S. 69/H. 210. This legislation is said to raise significant issues related to privacy, data security, and First Amendment rights for young users.
Although improvements have been made since a similar measure was vetoed last year, the VAADC still requires age assessment measures that could compromise personal data and restrict internet access for minors. The bill might also conflict with Vermont's broader data privacy efforts. CCIA believes these issues necessitate careful reconsideration of the bill’s potential unintended consequences before proceeding further.
The legislation mandates that businesses collect additional personal data from Vermont residents to determine users’ ages. It raises constitutional concerns by potentially violating children’s First Amendment protections through restrictions on online access. Many young people depend on online services for educational content and peer support, resources that may not be locally available. Broad age assurance provisions could unintentionally hinder children from accessing necessary information and support.
Megan Stokes, State Policy Director for CCIA, commented: “While we appreciate Vermont lawmakers’ efforts to refine the VAADC, the bill still presents serious concerns about privacy, free expression, and regulatory conflicts." She emphasized that age assurance would require businesses to collect more personal data, which might weaken privacy protections Vermont aims to strengthen.
Stokes added that similar laws in other states have faced legal challenges over constitutional compliance issues and warned that this bill could lead to costly litigation borne by Vermont taxpayers. "We urge Vermont legislators to take a careful, measured approach and ensure that any legislation supports both online safety and strong data privacy protections — without infringing on users’ rights or imposing costly legal risks on the state,” she stated.
