Summary
Vice opinion piece (Dec 2022) by Evan Greer, deputy director of Fight for the Future, written during Senate Democrats’ end-of-session push to attach KOSA to the must-pass omnibus defense package. Lays out the “duty of care” critique that became the spine of every subsequent KOSA opposition argument: the bill empowers state AGs (Paxton, Rutledge) to define what’s “in the best interests” of children, which they have already declared includes banning trans healthcare and drag shows. Connects the 2018 FOSTA failure mode (platforms over-moderate to avoid liability) directly to KOSA. Includes detailed parental-tools abuse scenarios (non-custodial parents, post-majority trans kids escaping abusive homes).
Key Points
- End-of-2022 omnibus push: Senate Dem leadership trying to attach KOSA to defense spending bill; opposed in 90+ org letter (ACLU, GLAAD, GLSEN, NCTE, ALA, Access Now).
- Duty of care critique: Legally undefined; state AGs decide; Paxton, Rutledge already weaponizing similar language against trans healthcare.
- Heritage Foundation is openly calling for KOSA to be used against the trans community.
- SESTA/FOSTA precedent: Platforms shut down sex-worker, sex-ed, and LGBTQ+ communities to avoid liability rather than improve safety.
- Parental tools risk scenarios:
- Hostile parent blocks LGBTQ+ resources for queer minor
- Non-custodial parent gets control over minor’s account
- Abusive non-biological adult (parent’s ex) gains control
- Trans teen who reaches majority but parent claims they’re still a minor
- Encryption risk: As written, KOSA could prevent E2EE adoption; Greer cites Make DMs Safe campaign post-Roe.
- Constructive alternatives proposed: ADPPA (federal data privacy), AICOA, Open App Markets Act — antitrust + privacy without the duty-of-care censorship vector.
Newsletter Angles
- The original duty-of-care critique — every later KOSA opposition piece in this cluster builds on this framing. If you cite anyone on KOSA’s structural flaws, cite Greer’s Dec 2022 Vice piece.
- Editorial hook: Greer’s framing — “Like SESTA/FOSTA, KOSA doesn’t touch the core issues with Big Tech’s extractive, exploitative business model” — is the cleanest way to articulate the bait-and-switch logic.
- Personal voice (“I’m the parent of a tween”) — useful illustration of how to frame opposition without sounding like a tech lobbyist.
- The parental-tools abuse scenarios are unusually concrete and would translate well into any KOSA explainer.
Entities Mentioned
- Evan Greer — author; Fight for the Future deputy director
- Fight for the Future — author’s org
- Ken Paxton — TX AG; cited as duty-of-care abuse risk
- Leslie Rutledge — AR AG; cited as duty-of-care abuse risk
- Heritage Foundation — openly anti-trans KOSA framing
- ACLU — coalition signatory
- GLAAD — coalition signatory
- GLSEN — coalition signatory
- National Center for Transgender Equality — coalition signatory
- American Library Association — coalition signatory
- Access Now — coalition signatory
Concepts Mentioned
- KOSA
- Duty of Care (Internet Bills) — the central legal critique
- FOSTA — historical precedent
- End-to-End Encryption
- ADPPA — proposed alternative
- AICOA — proposed alternative
- Open App Markets Act — proposed alternative
- Surveillance Capitalism
Quotes
“But instead of actually protecting kids, Congress seems poised to use them as pawns to rush through legislation that will do more harm than good.”
“This duty of care approach is foundationally wrong, and there is not much that could save it. That’s because a duty of care is nebulous and is rarely certain until applied to specific facts and decided in court. That uncertainty allows right wing AGs to back into any definition that suits their political goals.”
“Like we saw in the wake of SESTA/FOSTA, corporate platforms wouldn’t respond to KOSA by making their products safer, but by making the companies themselves less susceptible to legal risk.”
Notes
Vice; clearly opinion (op-ed) by an organization director. The legal arguments are corroborated by the 90+ org coalition letter referenced. The parental-tools scenarios are speculative but well-grounded in known patterns.
This is the canonical KOSA-opposition argument document for this wiki — every later piece in the cluster (Bonesteel/Them, Greer-Rose/Teen Vogue 2025, Philips/Teen Vogue 2023, Povolny) refers back to or echoes this framing. Strong candidate for direct quote in any KOSA-related newsletter piece.