Legal Expert Criticizes Age Assurance Laws as Segregating and Suppressing: 

Published Date : 7/7/2025 

A Stanford Law School paper redefines age assurance legislation as 'segregate-and-suppress' laws, sparking controversy over online safety measures. The study questions the effectiveness of age verification for children, highlighting risks to privacy and digital access. 

Language plays a critical role in shaping how societies adopt and evolve technologies. The debate over laws requiring digital age checks for online content has led to a complex lexicon. Initially, 'age verification' was a broad term, but it has since evolved into 'age assurance,' which includes subcategories like age verification (requiring a date of birth) and age estimation (using algorithms to guess age ranges). This shift in terminology reflects ongoing debates about the legal and ethical implications of such measures. n nA new paper by Eric Goldman, a Stanford Law School professor, introduces the term 'segregate-and-suppress laws' to describe online safety legislation. Goldman argues that these laws, which mandate age authentication for all users, create unintended consequences. He claims that while the intent is to protect minors, the implementation often harms both children and adults. The paper critiques the lack of consistency in how jurisdictions define minors, determine age, and enforce restrictions, leading to fragmented and ineffective policies. n nGoldman's analysis focuses on the term 'age assurance,' which he defines as confirming a user is an adult without specifying their exact age. He contrasts this with 'age verification,' which he claims requires precise age data. However, modern methods like tokenized verification allow third parties to confirm age thresholds without exposing personal information, a nuance Goldman acknowledges but downplays. His argument hinges on the idea that age authentication creates privacy risks and economic burdens for publishers, potentially reducing online content availability and exacerbating digital divides. n nThe paper also raises concerns about government surveillance, suggesting that age authentication infrastructure could be co-opted for broader control. Goldman cites examples like France's age verification laws for pornographic sites, arguing that such measures limit access to content but fail to address underlying issues. He questions whether the economic costs of compliance outweigh the benefits, particularly for smaller publishers facing higher authentication expenses. n nCritics of Goldman's stance argue that restricting harmful content, such as explicit material or self-harm sites, is a necessary trade-off for protecting minors. They also challenge his focus on innovation, noting that free access to certain content has been linked to negative impacts on youth mental health. Additionally, the paper's reliance on U.S.-centric legal frameworks overlooks differences in regulatory approaches across countries like the UK and Canada, where social trust and free speech standards vary. n nGoldman's solutions emphasize digital literacy and parental involvement, suggesting that education and research could mitigate risks better than strict regulations. However, his recommendations are seen as aligned with industry interests, given his history of supporting tech companies in legal battles against age assurance laws. The paper's conclusion questions whether regulators genuinely prioritize child protection or are influenced by corporate lobbying. n nThe debate over age assurance legislation highlights the tension between privacy, safety, and free access. As policies evolve, stakeholders must balance these competing interests while addressing the unique challenges of the digital age. 

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQS): 

Q: What is 'segregate-and-suppress' legislation?

A: It refers to online safety laws that require age authentication for all users, leading to restrictions on minors' access to content. Critics argue these laws create privacy risks and economic burdens while failing to effectively protect children.

Q: Why does Eric Goldman criticize age assurance laws?

A: Goldman claims these laws harm minors by restricting access to content, increasing surveillance risks, and creating economic pressures on publishers. He argues they lack consistency and fail to address broader societal needs.

Q: How do age verification methods work?

A: Modern methods include tokenized verification, where users confirm age without sharing personal data. Traditional age verification requires a date of birth, while age estimation uses algorithms to guess age ranges.

Q: What are the potential downsides of age assurance laws?

A: They may limit access to content, increase digital divides, and create infrastructure for government surveillance. Critics also argue they prioritize corporate interests over child protection.

Q: What solutions does the paper propose?

A: Goldman suggests improving digital literacy, training parents, and conducting more research on the internet's impact on minors. However, his recommendations are seen as favoring industry interests over strict regulatory measures. 

More Related Topics :