CCDH’s End of Year Wish List for Congress

Content warning: This article discusses suicide, self-harm, eating disorders, substance abuse, sextortion and sexual exploitation. 

Congress has only a few months left to turn years of hearings and promises into law. 

As lawmakers prepare to return from the August recess, several bills that could protect children and Big Tech victims are waiting for floor votes or further committee action. Some have already won broad bipartisan support. None can protect a single person until Congress finishes the job. 

Here is what CCDH wants lawmakers to pass before the 119th Congress ends. 

1. Give platforms a legal duty to protect children 

Parents should be able to trust that social media is designed with their children’s safety in mind. 

Bereaved families have spent years demanding answers about how recommendations, notifications and private messages shaped what their children saw and who could reach them. Their experiences show how decisions made inside technology companies can leave children exposed to abuse and exploitation. 

Financial sextortion is one growing threat. The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children received more than 50,000 reports of financial sextortion in 2025, an average of 137 reports a day. That was up from more than 36,000 reports in 2024. 

Offenders often use fake social media accounts to convince children to share intimate images before demanding money. They may threaten to send the images to friends and family. Children can be left feeling frightened, ashamed and unable to see a way out. 

Platforms shape who can contact children and how quickly private conversations can move beyond public view. They decide which safeguards are enabled by default. A legal duty of care would require them to take reasonable steps to prevent foreseeable harm. 

Senate Kids Online Safety Act (Blackburn/Blumenthal), S. 1748 

• What it would do: Establish a duty of care for online platforms, require safer default settings for children, and give young users and parents tools to manage recommendations, privacy, notifications, and other potentially harmful features. 
• Key leads: Senators Marsha Blackburn and Richard Blumenthal. 
• House lead: None identified for the Senate version. 
• Where it stands: The Senate Commerce Committee advanced the bill on August 5. It awaits a full Senate vote. 
• Why CCDH supports it: Platforms make choices that affect children’s mental health and safety while carrying limited responsibility for the results. A duty of care would require companies to take foreseeable harms seriously. 

2. Protect children who use AI chatbots

Children are already turning to AI chatbots for information, advice and companionship. These products can hold private, highly personal conversations, sometimes over long periods. Depending on how they are designed, chatbots may retain information and use it to personalize future responses. 

Parents may have little idea what was said or stored when their child asked about suicide, eating disorders, drugs or violence. 

CCDH found serious risks in our Fake Friend investigation. Researchers tested ChatGPT with accounts posing as 13-year-olds and received 1,200 responses to 60 harmful prompts. More than half of those responses, 53 percent, contained harmful content related to suicide and self-harm, eating disorders or substance abuse. 

In one case, ChatGPT generated a suicide note for a fictional teenager in crisis. It also produced instructions related to self-harm, restrictive diets, and dangerous drug use. 

AI companies are releasing products that can influence children during moments of acute vulnerability. Safety standards must be built into those products from the beginning, with consequences when companies fail to address foreseeable risks. 

Two bills now before the Senate would begin that work. 

The Youth AI Privacy Act, introduced by Senator Edward Markey, would restrict how AI chatbots use children’s personal data. It would prohibit advertising to minors and prevent companies from using their data to train chatbots or create profiles. The bill would also limit chatbot memory and features designed to encourage prolonged use, including push notifications. 

The CHATBOT Act, introduced by Senators Ted Cruz, Brian Schatz, John Curtis and Adam Schiff, would require family accounts and parental consent for teenagers to use covered chatbots. It would place protective settings on teen accounts by default and give parents tools to manage their child’s use. The bill would also require companies to make reasonable efforts to prevent chatbots from presenting obscene material or facilitating suicidal ideation to minors. 

The Senate Commerce Committee advanced both bills on August 5. They now need votes from the full Senate. 

AI chatbots are already part of children’s lives. Congress cannot wait for further harm before setting rules. 

Youth AI Privacy Act, S. 4199 

• What it would do: Limit the use of minors’ data for targeted advertising, profiling, and AI training. It would also place limits on chatbot memory and push notifications. 
• Lead: Senator Edward Markey (D-MA). 
• House lead: None identified. 
• Where it stands: The Senate Commerce Committee advanced the bill on August 5. It awaits a full Senate vote. 
• Why CCDH supports it: A child’s private conversation should not become advertising data or training material. Limits on memory and notifications give families more control over the features that encourage longer, more personal exchanges. 

CHATBOT Act, S. 4407 

• What it would do: Require family accounts, parental consent for teens, and protective default settings. Parents could limit chat time, disable push alerts and reward features, and restrict access to sexually explicit material and assistance with suicide. 
• Leads: Senators Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Brian Schatz (D-HI) 
• House lead: None identified. 
• Where it stands: The Senate Commerce Committee advanced the bill unanimously on August 5. It awaits a full Senate vote. 
• Why CCDH supports it: Parents need a way to set boundaries before a child is drawn into a risky conversation. Safer defaults put protection in place before families have to search through settings or respond to a crisis. 

3. Give survivors of AI-generated abuse a path to justice 

AI has made it easier to create convincing images, videos, and replicas of real people. 

When someone’s face, body or voice is used without consent, the consequences can follow them long after the original content disappears. 

Removing abusive content is essential. It cannot erase every copy, repair the damage or give survivors justice. 

The DEFIANCE Act would give people targeted by nonconsensual, sexually explicit deepfakes a federal right to take civil action. The NO FAKES Act would create broader protections against unauthorized digital replicas of a person’s voice or likeness. 

The two bills address different forms of AI-generated abuse. Both recognize the same basic principle. People should control how their identity is used and have a way to act when that control is violated. 

DEFIANCE Act, S. 1837 

• What it would do: Create a federal civil cause of action for people whose intimate images or sexually explicit deepfakes are shared without consent. 
• Leads: Senators Dick Durbin (D-IL) and Lindsey Graham (R-SC) 
• House leads: Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY-14) and Representative Laurel Lee (R-FL-15). 
• Where it stands: The Senate passed the bill by unanimous consent on January 13, 2026. It awaits action in the House, where it hasn’t received a committee vote. 
• Why CCDH supports it: Removing an image cannot undo every copy or repair every consequence. A federal civil remedy would give survivors a direct way to seek accountability. 

NO FAKES Act, S. 4591 

• What it would do: Create federal protections against the unauthorized use of a person’s voice or likeness in AI-generated digital replicas. 
• Leads: Senators Chris Coons and Marsha Blackburn 
• House leads: Representative Maria Elvira Salazar (R-FL-27) and Representative Madeleine Dean (D-PA-4). 
• Where it stands: The Senate Judiciary Committee advanced the bill by voice vote on June 18. It awaits consideration by the full Senate. The House version hasn’t received a committee vote.  
• Why CCDH supports it: A person’s voice and likeness can be used to impersonate, harass, exploit, or defraud them. Clear federal rules would give people and platforms a workable way to respond. 

4. Hold AI companies accountable when their products cause harm 

Every protection in this agenda comes back to decisions made inside technology companies. 

Companies decide which risks to test, when a product is ready for release and how quickly to respond when someone is harmed. Voluntary promises can change when public attention moves on. Legal accountability creates a reason to take safety seriously at every stage. 

The AI LEAD Act, introduced by Senators Dick Durbin and Josh Hawley, would classify AI systems as products and create a federal route for product liability claims when those systems cause harm. 

The bill would allow private individuals, state attorneys general and the U.S. attorney general to bring claims against AI developers and deployers. It was introduced in September 2025 and remains before the Senate Judiciary Committee. 

Technology companies should face the same basic expectation that applies to other industries. When they release a dangerous product, the people harmed should have a way to hold them accountable. 

AI LEAD Act, S. 2937 

• What it would do: Create legal accountability for AI companies whose products cause foreseeable harm. 
• Key leads: Senators Dick Durbin and Josh Hawley. 
• Where it stands: The bill was introduced in September 2025 and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee. It has not received a committee vote. 
• Why CCDH supports it: Company promises can change with product plans and public attention. A clear legal standard gives companies a lasting reason to test products, warn users, fix dangerous features, and take responsibility when people are harmed. 

Congress needs to finish the work 

Members of Congress have shown that bipartisan progress is possible. Committees have moved bills addressing privacy, chatbot design, online platforms, AI-generated abuse, and corporate accountability. 

Congressional leaders must schedule the votes needed to move these bills forward. Where the House and Senate have taken different approaches, lawmakers should preserve the provisions that place meaningful responsibilities on technology companies. 

Parents and survivors are already living with the consequences of unsafe products. They should not have to wait through another Congress for action. 

As lawmakers geta ready to return from the holiday recess, they should give families meaningful progress toward a digital world built around their safety. Passing these bills would make a place for accountability, privacy, and protections people can use.