Stop the Scroll Act

Bill Number

S. 1885

Origin Chamber

Senate

Congress

119th Congress, Session 1

Policy Area

Commerce

Status

Introduced

Latest Action

2026-04-14: Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.

Last Updated

2026-04-16T12:48:13Z

AI-Generated Summary

Purpose of the Legislation

The "Stop the Scroll Act" (S. 1885) aims to protect users' mental health by requiring social media and anonymous content-sharing platforms to display warning labels about potential mental health risks. It seeks to increase awareness of harms like bullying, harassment, and addiction driven by platform algorithms, drawing on public health approaches similar to tobacco or alcohol warnings. The bill is based on findings from the U.S. Surgeon General's 2023 advisory highlighting social media's negative effects.

Key Provisions

• Definitions:
• Covered platform: Includes "social media platforms" (as defined in existing law, generally public websites or apps for sharing user-generated content) and "anonymous content sharing platforms" (websites or apps without registration for sharing images, videos, texts, or live chats).
• Covered platform provider: Any person or entity operating such platforms for commercial purposes in U.S. commerce.
• User: Anyone who registers, creates a profile, or accesses the platform.

• Warning Label Requirements:
• Providers must display a clear, prominent mental health warning label every time a user in the U.S. accesses the platform.
• The label warns of potential negative mental health impacts (e.g., anxiety, depression from excessive use) and provides links to federal resources like the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline.
• The label can only disappear if the user exits the platform or acknowledges the risks and proceeds; it must reappear after one hour of continuous use.
• Restrictions: Labels cannot be hidden in hyperlinks, terms of service, or obscured by other information; users cannot disable them except through acknowledgment.

• Implementation and Oversight:
• The Federal Trade Commission (FTC), with approval from the Secretary of Health and Human Services (via the Surgeon General), must issue regulations within 180 days of enactment detailing label requirements.
• Regulations will be reviewed and updated every five years to reflect advances in technology, markets, and medical knowledge.

• Enforcement:
• Violations are treated as unfair or deceptive practices under the FTC Act, allowing the FTC to investigate, impose penalties (up to inflation-adjusted maximums, e.g., based on days of noncompliance or affected users), and seek remedies.
• Applies to nonprofits and common carriers (e.g., telecom providers hosting platforms), expanding FTC jurisdiction.
• State attorneys general can sue on behalf of residents for civil penalties, with notice to the FTC; the FTC can intervene in state cases.
• Extraterritorial reach: Applies to violations affecting U.S. individuals or acts committed in the U.S.
• Effective date: One year after enactment.

Significant Changes to Existing Law

• Introduces a new mandate for mental health disclosures on digital platforms, not previously required under federal law.
• Builds on the FTC Act (15 U.S.C. 41 et seq.) by classifying noncompliance as an unfair or deceptive act, enabling standard FTC enforcement tools.
• Expands FTC authority to nonprofits and common carriers, overriding some exemptions in existing FTC rules.
• Incorporates the definition of "social media platform" from the 2022 Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act but adds anonymous platforms, broadening scope beyond registered users.
• Allows coordinated state-federal enforcement, similar to consumer protection laws, but with specific notice and intervention procedures to avoid duplication.

Potential Impacts

• Government Agencies: Increases workload for the FTC (rulemaking, enforcement) and HHS/Surgeon General (concurrence on regulations); states gain new tools for consumer protection lawsuits, potentially leading to more coordinated actions.
• Citizens: Users, especially youth, may gain better awareness of risks, encouraging reduced screen time and access to mental health support; could promote healthier online habits without restricting access.
• Platform Providers: Requires technical changes (e.g., pop-up labels, timers), potentially raising compliance costs; might influence platform design to mitigate addiction features.
• International Relations: Minimal direct impact, but extraterritorial provisions could affect foreign-based platforms (e.g., TikTok) serving U.S. users, possibly prompting diplomatic or trade discussions on digital regulation.

Main Stakeholders Affected

• Covered Platform Providers: Social media companies (e.g., Facebook, Instagram, X/Twitter) and anonymous platforms (e.g., certain chat apps or image boards), who must implement and maintain labels.
• Users: Primarily U.S. residents, including minors exposed to risks like harassment or exploitation; benefits mental health advocates and families concerned about online safety.
• Government Entities: FTC for primary enforcement; HHS/Surgeon General for health expertise; state attorneys general and consumer protection offices for litigation support.
• Broader Groups: Mental health organizations (e.g., those linked to 988 Lifeline) gain visibility; tech industry groups may oppose due to regulatory burden.

Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications

• Legal: Strengthens consumer protection by analogizing platforms to high-risk products (e.g., tobacco), using established FTC mechanisms for penalties; state enforcement enhances local accountability but includes safeguards against overlapping federal actions to prevent forum-shopping.
• Constitutional: The required disclosures are factual and health-focused, likely upheld as compelled commercial speech under the First Amendment (similar to product warning labels); however, platform providers might challenge label prominence or frequency as overly burdensome.
• Political: Bipartisan sponsorship (Sens. Britt and Fetterman) signals cross-aisle concern over social media harms; aligns with growing scrutiny of tech accountability but could spark debates on government overreach into private platforms versus public health needs.

This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.

Sponsor

Sen. Britt, Katie Boyd [R-AL]

Cosponsors (4)

Sen. Fetterman, John [D-PA], Sen. Husted, Jon [R-OH], Sen. Slotkin, Elissa [D-MI], Sen. Hassan, Margaret Wood [D-NH]

Recent Actions

• 2026-04-14: Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Ordered to be reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably.
• 2025-05-22: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
• 2025-05-22: Introduced in Senate

Bill Versions

• Stop the Scroll Act — issued 2025-05-22 — PDF (13 pages)