Law / United States / 
Nebraska
LB 383 (2025), Parental Rights in Social Media Act
Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 86-1701 to 86-1705
In force since partly blocked by a court, under challenge in court.
A social media and minors rule binding private bodies.
- Age threshold
- 18
- Covered services
- Social media companies as defined by the Act.
- How the hook was established
- express
- What makes it apply
- Data subject residence
- Obligation class
- Age verification, Consent
- Verification methods
- Gov ID, Third party service, Parental consent
- Audit expectation
- none
- Court action
A suit challenging this law is pending. No court has blocked it. Premium data
What it requires
- Verify the age of prospective account holders on your social media platform using a reasonable age verification method.no control in the NIST Privacy Framework
- Obtain a parent's express, verified consent before a minor may hold an account.NIST Privacy FrameworkCT.PO-P1
- Give parents tools to view a minor's messages, control privacy settings, and limit time on the platform; the requirement to give parents access to a minor's posts, interactions, and messages was not enjoined.NIST Privacy FrameworkCT.PO-P3
These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text.
In the frameworks
- NIST Privacy Framework
- CT.PO-P1Policies, processes, and procedures for authorizing data processing (e.g., organizational decisions, individual consent), revoking authorizations, and maintaining authorizations are established and in place.
- CT.PO-P3Policies, processes, and procedures for enabling individuals’ data processing preferences and requests are established and in place.
Our reading of where this law's duties sit in each framework, and in the NIST Privacy Framework, line by line beside each duty above. It never says that running a control meets the law. How we read a framework against the law
If you get it wrong
Criminal exposureNo
Private right of actionYes
Penalties
Civil penalty up to $2,500 per violation, in addition to a private right of action for actual damages.
Penalty structure
This civil penalty is separate from the uncapped actual damages available to an aggrieved person under Neb. Rev. Stat. Sec. 86-1704.
- Rule
- Per violation only
- As of
- Currency
- USD
- Per violation unit
- Violation
- Per violation amount
- 2,500
Who enforces it
Enforcement body
Nebraska Attorney General, plus a private right of action for affected individuals
Litigation
- Court
- U.S. District Court for the District of Nebraska
- Docket
- D. Neb. No. 4:26-cv-03149, NetChoice v. Hilgers
- Posture
- Senior Judge John M. Gerrard preliminarily enjoined the age verification and parental consent provisions on , days before their planned effective date, finding they likely violate the First Amendment rights of users and platforms. The requirement that platforms give parents access to a minor's posts, interactions, and messages was not enjoined.
Settledness
A federal court preliminarily enjoined the Attorney General from enforcing the age verification and parental consent duties on , and left the duty to give parents methods to view a minor's posts and messages in force. The order is preliminary and the case is not decided.
- As of
- Under challenge
- Yes
- Open questions
- Does a service on which account holders communicate only by private message 'enable an account holder to communicate with other account holders and users through posts' within the definition of social media platform in Neb. Rev. Stat. 86-1702(11)(a)?
- What evidence makes an individual 'reasonably believed by a social media platform to be under eighteen years of age' under Neb. Rev. Stat. 86-1702(5)(a)?
What it makes you log
What the log must hold
Age assurance result, Consent or opt-out state
Log retention
- As of
- Basis
- Purpose bound
- Prohibits retaining
- Any identifying information of an individual, held by the social media company or a third-party vendor, after verification is complete
Logging duty
The company must verify a minor's age and a parent's consent, receive the parent's signed form, and need not reverify unless consent is revoked, which cannot be shown without keeping the outcome. Section 86-1703(1)(b) bars keeping identifying information once verification is complete, so the statute keeps the result and not the identifying data.
- Kind
- Implicit
- As of
- Provision
- Neb. Rev. Stat. 86-1703(1)(a), (2) and (3)(a)
- Trigger
- age_assurance
- consent_or_optout
What this law does
Would require social media companies to verify the age of prospective account holders using a reasonable age verification method and to obtain a parent's express, verified consent before a minor may hold an account, with parental tools to view messages, control privacy settings, and limit time on the platform.
How courts have read itPremium data
Our analysis of this law draws on 1 court ruling.
What each ruling held, what it means for an app, and whether it still stands are premium data, in the Plus, Pro and Enterprise plans.
When LexLint raises it
When your app profile says your app operates a social platform.
Back to the example · Lint your app
Page updated .