All Roll Calls
Yes: 710 • No: 411
Sponsored By: Peggy Scott (Republican)
Became Law
Personalized for You
Personalize government policy and PRIA will tell you what this bill means for your household, plus every other piece of legislation we track. PRIA reads each provision against your financial profile to show you exactly what matters to your wallet.
5 provisions identified: 3 benefits, 1 costs, 1 mixed.
Beginning November 1, 2026, Minnesota children age 15 or younger and their parents can sue over child account violations. Covered platforms have at least $1 billion in worldwide ad revenue in any of the prior three years. Families can seek court orders, damages, court costs and fees, reasonable attorney fees, and other appropriate relief. Winning claimants get $10,000 in statutory damages, plus proven actual damages, for knowing or reckless violations. Courts may also award punitive damages for a consistent pattern of knowing or reckless conduct. Damages lawsuits must be filed within three years after the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known about the violation. For a child account holder, that time limit is paused until age 18. These enforcement rules apply to accounts created before, on, or after November 1, 2026.
Beginning November 1, 2026, covered platforms must give notice within seven days after deciding a child account lacks verified parental consent. The notice must explain why the account must close. Account holders have 30 days from notice to complete age verification and dispute the child classification, or provide verified parental consent. Platforms can use any commercially reasonable age check and must reasonably decide disputes within 30 days after verification ends. If closure is still required, the platform must close the account within seven days of its decision.
Beginning November 1, 2026, account contracts formed in violation of the child account rules are invalid and unenforceable. Platforms cannot use contracts or terms of service to waive these rules. Without parental consent sufficient to form a binding contract under Minnesota law, a child's account contract cannot be enforced. This includes terms requiring arbitration or limiting liability or remedies. The protection applies even when the platform did not know the child's age.
Beginning November 1, 2026, knowing or reckless violations of the child account rules count as deceptive trade practices. Minnesota's attorney general has authority to enforce the law against covered platforms. This state enforcement power does not itself give families a payment or an individual remedy.
Beginning November 1, 2026, covered platforms are not liable for violations if they used reasonable means and reasonable efforts to comply. That standard considers available technology and data the platform possessed. This defense limits families' ability to hold a platform liable even when a violation occurred.
Peggy Scott
Republican • House
Keith Allen
Republican • House
Kristin Bahner
Democratic • House
Ben Bakeberg
Republican • House
Dave Baker
Republican • House
Greg Davids
Republican • House
Tom Dippel
Republican • House
Jeff Dotseth
Republican • House
Steve Elkins
Democratic • House
Elliott Engen
Republican • House
Julie Greene
Democratic • House
Jon Koznick
Republican • House
Maye Quade
Affiliation unavailable
Andrew Myers
Republican • House
Bernie Perryman
Republican • House
Kristin Robbins
Republican • House
Erica Schwartz
Republican • House
Andy Smith
Democratic • House
Chris Swedzinski
Republican • House
Natalie Zeleznikar
Republican • House
All Roll Calls
Yes: 710 • No: 411
House vote • 5/16/2026
Repassage, as amended by the Senate
Yes: 131 • No: 2
Senate vote • 5/15/2026
Third Reading
Yes: 66 • No: 0
House vote • 5/12/2026
Amendment, as amended
Yes: 82 • No: 50
House vote • 5/12/2026
Passage, as amended
Yes: 132 • No: 2
House vote • 5/12/2026
Amendment
Yes: 15 • No: 111
House vote • 5/12/2026
Amendment, as amended
Yes: 67 • No: 66
House vote • 5/12/2026
Amendment to Smith Amendment
Yes: 83 • No: 47
House vote • 5/12/2026
Amendment to Smith Amendment
Yes: 67 • No: 67
House vote • 5/12/2026
Amendment to Smith Amendment
Yes: 67 • No: 66
Secretary of State Chapter 111
Governor's action Approval
Presentment date
Bill was repassed as amended by the Senate vote: 131-2
Third reading as amended by the Senate
Motion prevailed
Motion to concur with Senate amendments
Returned from Senate with amendment
Third reading Passed as amended vote: 66-0
Special Order: Amendeda
Second reading
Comm report: Rule 45-amend, subst. General Orders SF4696
Referred to Rules and Administration for comparison with SF4696
Introduction and first reading
Received from House
Author added Engen
Bill was passed as amended vote: 132-2
Third reading as amended
Amendeda
Amendments offered
Motion prevailed
Motion for reconsideration Greenman amendment
Motion prevailed
Motion for reconsideration Smith amendment
Amendeda
1st Engrossment
2nd Engrossment
3rd Engrossment
4th Engrossment
5th Engrossment
Introduction
SF 4282, Various agency forecast adjustments
SF 4476, Omnibus Human Services supplemental appropriations
SF 334, Human Services Systems Modernization Advisory Council and Legislative Commission on Human Services Systems; creation
HF 3489, Licensing boards reporting required, criminal offense of grooming established, criminal penalties provided, and money appropriated.
HF 4188, Commerce policy bill.
HF 4252, Higher education finance and policy bill.