NC lawmakers balk at teen social media bill, looser ‘granny flat’ laws

The North Carolina House on Tuesday rejected Senate changes to a bill that would restrict or ban social media access for children under 16. The chambers will now negotiate tweaks to the bill on provisions over age verification, parental controls and enforcement.

House Bill 301 would prohibit children younger than 14 from creating accounts on certain social media platforms and require parental consent for 14- and 15-year-olds. The legislation would also require age verification and impose new restrictions on how platforms use data collected from minors.

While lawmakers have largely agreed on the goal of protecting children online, questions about enforcement and age verification have emerged as major sticking points.

Rep. Jeff Zenger, R-Forsyth, the bill's sponsor, said lawmakers plan to use conference negotiations to revise portions of the legislation and potentially add what he calls a "default-to-safety" approach that would put more responsibility on parents.

"We're already working on language," Zenger told WRAL News before Tuesday's vote. "We want to get it right."

Both chambers would still have to approve the changes before the legislation could move to Gov. Josh Stein's desk. Lawmakers have expressed optimism that negotiations could move quickly.

The current bill requires what lawmakers classify as “addictive” social media platforms to verify users' ages using systems that rely on a third-party verifier.

Platforms would be required to prevent children under 14 from creating accounts and obtain parental consent for users ages 14 and 15. But that poses a challenge for companies since many social media platforms rely on users to self-report their age when creating an account.

Zenger said conference negotiations are expected to focus less on government-issued identification requirements and more on requiring parental controls to be enabled by default.

Under the concept being discussed, certain parental safety settings would automatically apply to platforms or devices. Parents would then have to actively disable those protections before a child could gain access.

"You can't make people be great parents,” Zenger said, “but you can give them all the tools."

He pointed to parental-control systems already available through technology companies and app stores, arguing that many of the tools needed to implement age-based restrictions already exist.

Whitney Christensen, an attorney representing Meta, previously told lawmakers the company prefers legislation similar to Alabama's App Store Accountability Act, which would require app stores — rather than individual social media platforms — to verify users' ages and obtain parental consent for minors before downloading apps. Meta has argued app stores are better positioned to handle age verification because they already have information about users and devices. 

Spokespeople for Apple and Google didn’t immediately respond to requests for comment.

The legislation would punish companies that establish loopholes for children to go around state law, and it would classify violations as a deceptive trade practice.

Under the current version, the state attorney general could seek civil penalties of up to $50,000 per violation against companies. 

The bill also creates a private right of action, allowing users to sue a platform that knowingly or recklessly violates the law. Successful plaintiffs could recover up to $10,000 in damages, along with attorney fees and court costs.

The bill also includes several education-related provisions focused on artificial intelligence.

The legislation would require the State Board of Education to incorporate artificial intelligence literacy into computer science standards, direct the Department of Public Instruction to develop a model AI policy for schools and establish a framework for evaluating AI-powered educational tools.

Teachers across North Carolina would also be required to complete professional development training on artificial intelligence under the proposal.

State senators on Tuesday balked at a bill that would make it easier for homeowners to build backyard cottages and other small secondary homes. The Senate voted to reject House amendments to Senate Bill 445, also known as the “Regulatory Reform Act of 2026.” State Sen. Steve Jarvis, R-Davidson, said the bill “needs more work.” 

The legislation seeks changes to a wide variety of regulations and combines dozens of policy changes affecting housing, permitting and state regulatory authority, with a central focus on shifting control of certain land-use decisions from local governments to the state.

Supporters say the bill reduces red tape that can slow development and drive up the cost of housing. Local governments and advocacy groups say it strips municipalities of key tools used to manage growth.

Local governments typically write the zoning and planning rules that determine what property owners are allowed to build throughout the jurisdiction. The bill would require cities with at least 50,000 residents to allow homeowners to build accessory dwelling units, or ADUs — often known as “granny flats.” Structures can include things such as garage apartments or backyard cottages on residential lots.

Under the bill, local governments would be allowed to regulate size and design but wouldn’t be allowed to prohibit ADUs in qualifying areas.

The state Senate also voted against moving forward with a bill that would have exempted Buncombe County from a new law regulating property tax appraisals.

Stein recently signed a law blocking some counties from using their new property appraisals to assess taxes on local property owners. The law, which enjoyed bipartisan support, only affects residents in Buncomble, Guilford, Harnett and a handful of other counties. 

The Senate on Tuesday rejected a House bill to exempt Buncombe County from the new law. Stein previously called on the legislature to exempt Buncombe, citing damages from Hurricane Helene that had hindered tax collections in the county. Jarvis said the Republican caucus had “some questions on the constitutionality of one section.” Senate leader Phil Berger, R-Rockingham, told reporters that he hopes the House and Senate can reach an agreement on the issue later this week.