A recent op-ed by Greg Aguirre in this newspaper made a heartfelt case for protecting children online. As a parent, I share his concern for the dangers our kids face in the digital world. But the solution he proposes, the federal App Store Accountability Act, is not empowerment. It is federal entanglement that risks undermining the very parental authority it claims to strengthen.
Parents are not “in the dark” about their children’s online activity. Every device sold today comes equipped with parental controls, monitoring tools and restrictions that can be tailored to each family’s values. What families need is education and encouragement to use those tools, not another federal mandate that shifts responsibility away from the home and into the hands of regulators. When government steps in to “help” parents, it often ends up replacing them.
Mr. Aguirre points to the tragic story of Sewell Setzer III, a young boy who took his own life after an unsafe interaction with an AI chatbot. That heartbreak should stir compassion in all of us. But policy born of grief must still be measured against constitutional freedoms.
No law can substitute for the vigilance of parents, and it shouldn’t attempt to. Using tragedy to justify sweeping mandates risks eroding liberty without solving the real problem: cultural abdication of parental responsibility.
The App Store Accountability Act would require centralized age verification and parental consent through app stores. Supporters argue this makes parents “chief regulators.” In reality, it makes government the regulator, creating a one-size-fits-all system that strips parents of flexibility. And even if the law were implemented exactly as written, it would do nothing to shield children from the dangers that exist inside the apps themselves, from predatory interactions to manipulative design features, leaving parents with a false sense of security while the real risks remain unchecked.
Contrary to Aguirre’s dismissal, birthdays and personal data are sensitive information. Centralized databases of minors’ information are ripe targets for hackers and expand the reach of government surveillance. Parents should not have to trade their child’s privacy for the illusion of safety.
Aguirre suggests that because the Supreme Court upheld age verification in certain contexts, this law is simply reinforcing existing safeguards. But there is a difference between verifying age for alcohol purchases or financial accounts and creating a federal pipeline of children’s data tied to every app download. That is not ordinary, and it is, in fact, a dangerous and slippery slope.
Florida has always led by defending freedom. We rejected mask and vaccine mandates because we realized that liberty and parental rights are not negotiable. Digital parenting should be no different. Instead of heading down the path of mandates and digital IDs, Florida should lead by promoting education for parenting in the digital age, demanding transparency from tech companies, and holding developers accountable when they mislabel content. We must focus on solutions that empower parents without sacrificing privacy or liberty.
The App Store Accountability Act is not empowerment; it’s a government mandate. Florida families deserve better: real transparency from tech companies, real accountability for harmful content, and real respect for parental authority.
Julie Barrett is the founder of Conservative Ladies of America, a grassroots political watchdog organization classified as a 501(c)(4). She resides in Sarasota and is a mother to four children.
