One year after Indiana policymakers enacted a law requiring pornography websites to verify users’ ages, a new bill seeks to further restrict Hoosiers under age 16 from creating social media accounts without “verified” parental permission. 

Senate Bill 11, authored by Republican Sen. Mike Bohacek, would require a social media operator like Facebook or TikTok to restrict a minor from accessing the site if they did not receive “verifiable parental consent” from the minor’s parent.

As currently drafted, the bill would additionally allow parents and legal guardians to sue social media providers if their child accesses a site without consent.

Indiana’s attorney general could also issue a civil investigative demand if the office has “reasonable cause to believe” the law was violated. If a social media operator “fails to implement a verifiable parental consent method,” the attorney general would further be allowed to ask a judge to step in and stop a minor from accessing the site, and request a civil penalty of up to $250,000 for each violation, according to the bill.

The bill was heard Wednesday in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Chairwoman Sen. Liz Brown, R-Fort Wayne, said the bill is expected to be amended and voted on by the committee next week.

“We’re not trying to regulate content, of what’s going on the various social media sites — that’s not what we’re trying to do,” said Bohacek, of Michiana Shores. “We’re looking to see, is just the fact that social media itself — regardless of the content that’s inside of it — is that, in and of itself, creating the mental health issues that we’re having right now with a lot of our kids? And I believe that’s what it is.”

The bill would be effective on July 1, if passed.

During the 2024 session, state lawmakers approved Senate Enrolled Act 17, requiring pornography websites to verify user ages. They hoped to keep children from accessing pornography, but adult content companies sued, arguing the law would be costly to implement and violate First Amendment and privacy rights.

A federal judge blocked enforcement last June before its intended July effectiveness date, but an appeals court later rolled back the preliminary injunction. The law is currently in effect while the litigation continues.

Must get consent

Current bill language specifies that “verifiable parental consent” could be obtained “through a method that is reasonably designed to ensure that the person providing the consent is a parent or legal guardian of the minor user.” The proposal also mandates social media providers to establish a procedure to allow a parent or legal guardian to revoke their consent.

At least 10 states have passed laws requiring children’s access to social media be restricted or parental consent gained, and several states’ laws are currently on hold, according to the Age Verification Providers Association, a trade body representing age verification services providers.

Bohacek said he already has multiple amendments to the bill, including to redefine social media, “because the definition we had originally was very, very broad.” The senator said the updated definition will make clear that sites requiring an account, username and password to access content would qualify. Platforms like YouTube, however — which do not necessarily require a user to sign in before accessing the website — would not be included.

Additionally, a provision in the bill to allow parents and guardians to file lawsuits against the companies if their child was subjected to bullying on the social media platform will be removed.

“We didn’t want to go down that road,” Bohacek said, referring to the bullying provision. “That’s going to be a little bit too much.”

Another anticipated amendment would require the attorney general’s office to give social media companies up to 30 days to remedy violations before any civil action is taken.

“The goal is not to just find and punish and penalize. It’s not what we’re trying to do here,” Bohacek said. “What we’re trying to do is getting our kids supervised on this new space, social media, and whatever content their accessing. But then also, if you feel your child is mature enough, and you feel like you want to supervise them enough, then you simply give them access to do that. And there’s a process in here to do that.”

Will restrictions keep kids off social media?

Sen. Rodney Pol, D-Chesterton, questioned whether the bill would actually keep youth from creating online accounts. A virtual private network, or VPN, for example, could allow minors to bypass technology used by social media companies to detect a user’s age.

“If a child used a VPN application in order to get around the law, well, that’s no different than jaywalking or speeding,” Bohacek argued. “You know the law, you went around the law, you just didn’t get caught.”

Concerns were also raised by committee members about joint custody cases, in which one parent or guardian consents to a child’s social media account, but the other parent or guardian does not.

Attorney general, adult websites clash in age verification lawsuit

Bohacek said he’d be willing to tweak the bill’s language to clarify that only “a” — meaning one — parent or guardian must provide their permission.

The Indiana Catholic Conference spoke in favor of the bill Wednesday evening. Only Chris Daley, representing the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana, spoke in opposition.

He said the bill “clearly infringes on the First Amendment rights of Hoosiers 15 and down, to the degree that those rights attach at certain ages.” Daley pointed to similar laws in Arkansas and Ohio that judges have enjoined — put on hold — amid ongoing legal challenges. If Senate Bill 11 is approved, he expects the law “will eventually be blocked and overturned.”

“I think we all know that this bill will be challenged, and there’s no reason to believe that a court in Indiana — a trial court, federal trial court — will come to a different conclusion,” Daley said. “These cases in Arkansas and Ohio will be resolved, and that could be the appropriate time we all take action. Or, alternatively to that, we could try to do something meaningful.”

Daley recommended for lawmakers to instead invest in mental health resources for Hoosier youth and focus on educating parents “on steps they can take already” to curb their kids’ internet access.

Brown and other Republicans on the committee pushed back.

“All we’re trying to do here, in my opinion … is to try to give parents a tool which they don’t currently have,” Brown said.

The Indiana women’s basketball team beat Northwestern 68-64 at Welsh-Ryan Arena on Wednesday night thanks to a go-ahead 3-pointer from Shay Ciezki with 1:05 to go. 

It was the Hoosiers (11-4; 3-1 Big Ten) sixth straight win over their Big Ten rival. 

Ciezki scored 13 of her game-high 20 points in the fourth quarter and scored six straight at one point with the Wildcats looking to make a comeback. She was the only IU player with a made field goal in the first five minutes of the fourth. 

The Penn State transfer went 3 of 4 from the field (2 of 2 from 3-point range) and 5 of 5 from the free-throw line down the stretch. She’s made 32 straight free-throw attempts going back to the team’s Nov. 24 loss to Baylor. 

Indiana struggled pulling away while shooting just 39.3% from the field. The Hoosiers led 20-11 at the start of the second quarter, but couldn’t build on the lead thanks to multiple extended scoring droughts. 

Northwestern kept it a two-possession game throughout the second half while getting a big night from reserve guard Melannie Daley. She led the team in scoring with 17 points and season-high six assists off the bench. 

It was her seventh straight game in double-digits. 

Indiana goes back on the road for a game against No. 23 Iowa on Sunday at 3 p.m. before returning home on for a game against Illinois on Jan. 16.

Michael Niziolek is the Indiana beat reporter for The Bloomington Herald-Times. You can follow him on X @michaelniziolek and read all his coverage by clicking here.

INDIANAPOLIS — The Indiana Pacers were facing a contract deadline on Tuesday with forward James Johnson. The veteran four man, who is in his 16th NBA season, entered the day on a partially guaranteed contract.

Johnson’s minimum deal this season had $750k guaranteed, though he has already surpassed that amount in late December in terms of accrued earnings. On January 10th, every contract in the NBA becomes guaranteed, so the full amount of Johnson’s deal would hit the books if he is still on Indiana’s roster on that date.

Technically, though, the contract guarantee date for Johnson came on Tuesday the 7th. That’s because a player has to clear the waiver process, which takes two days, by the 10th to have the non-guaranteed part of their salary removed from a team’s salary books. So if a player like Johnson — that had a contract which wasn’t fully guaranteed this season — wasn’t waived on/before Tuesday, then their contract would be fully guaranteed.

The Pacers kept Johnson through that date, meaning his $3.3 million salary is now guaranteed for the season, though Indiana is only responsible for just under $2.1 million of that. The rest is reimbursed by the NBA, so Indiana’s cap hit for Johnson for the remainder of the season is that $2.1 million number.

“He’s not going anywhere,” Pacers head coach Rick Carlisle told Dustin Dopirak of the Indianapolis Star this week when asked about Johnson. “We need him.”

Why did the Pacers keep James Johnson?

For the Pacers, the decision to keep Johnson or not was all about the balance of financial savings and leadership. The blue and gold are right up against the luxury tax — barely sitting under the tax threshold right now. Waiving Johnson on Tuesday would have saved the team $1.1 million and given them more distance below the tax line.

What Indiana had to determine is if there was a better use of that savings than having Johnson on the roster. He’s played in six games for the blue and gold this season, but his value comes almost entirely off the court, which has been made clear by the number of times the Pacers have re-signed Johnson.

He is one of the oldest players in the NBA and a key veteran for a growing Pacers team. His voice is well received, and he is one of the first players off the bench to offer encouragement or tips during in-game timeouts. His work behind the scenes is extremely important to the team, which is why he’s been around for three seasons.

As a result, Johnson was retained at the expense of some optionality. “He doesn’t let things slide,” Pacers guard T.J. McConnell said of Johnson a few years ago. “Usually, there are guys that let things go. But I feel like he feels like he owes it to us that we’re not going to create any bad habits here.”

Some flexibility could have been nice for the Pacers with the trade deadline approaching, but having more options only carries value if there are good options available. While a few more very specific trades could have opened up, they weren’t worth losing a valuable veteran.

Johnson, 37, has signed seven contracts with Indiana since September of 2022. He’s averaging 1.3 points per game this season, and guys love having him around. “He’s super valuable for the team. He’s kind of just like a glue guy,” Pacers rookie Johnny Furphy said of Johnson.

The Pacers opted for continuity in the offseason and kept Johnson. He’ll keep helping in his own way as Indiana looks to keep climbing the Eastern Conference standings.

“Those are my guys,” Johnson said of the Pacers after re-signing during the 2023-24 season. “I don’t think I would have went back [to the NBA] for any other call other than the Pacers.”