Concern about the effects of algorithms and artificial intelligence has been driving an onslaught of legislation at the Georgia General Assembly.
Lawmakers have unleashed more than half a dozen bills that would hold companies or individuals to account for the way they deploy these computational tools, especially when used to connect children with obscenity, erode privacy or exploit identities.
“There are artificial intelligence platforms that allow a person to take an ordinary photograph of someone — your wife, your daughter, your coworker, your friend — and with a few clicks digitally remove their clothing to fabricate an explicit image,” said Sen. Bo Hatchett, R-Cornelia, while presenting his artificial intelligence restraint bill on the Senate floor last month. “It’s being used as a bullying tactic in schools. It’s being used for revenge, and it’s being used to destroy reputations. As a father of daughters, I cannot ignore that.”
Senate Bill 398 would make “virtual peeping” a felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison. The maximum prison term would double when a manipulated image depicts a minor.
The Senate passed it 48-1 last month. It was a rare bipartisan vote that revealed the depth of concern about the tools that tech companies have been handing the public.
Georgia lawmakers have been trying to address child safety online since at least 2024 when they passed a law to limit social media companies’ access to children.
The industry sued in federal court in Atlanta and convinced a judge to block enforcement, asserting the law violated First Amendment speech protections.
Lt. Gov. Burt Jones backed that measure. The Republican then empaneled a bipartisan Senate committee to study the issue.
Sen. Sally Harrell, D-Atlanta, co-chaired the committee with a Republican senator. She said she became concerned after watching her own children interact with social media on the smartphones they had gotten in middle school, back when the devices and platforms were new and parents were less wary.
“I think the way the algorithmic feed works is damaging to kids, and I know that it fundamentally changed my kids,” she said during a hearing last week on Senate Bill 495, her attempt to tame social media. “It leaves a pit in my stomach.”
At that hearing, Angela Flanigan, the executive director of the Georgia Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, said social media platforms had been linked to disrupted sleep, reduced academic achievement and weakened emotional regulation, raising the risk of anxiety, depression and eating disorders.
The algorithms must be regulated because the companies will not change their designs voluntarily, Flanigan said. “They’re irresponsible.”
SB 495 sought to regulate how platforms harvest personal data and use it to feed algorithms that then drive “addictive” usage. It would have applied special restrictions to platforms that could gauge from their user data that at least 2% of their audience comprised minors.
The committee did not vote on the bill, making passage unlikely. The deadline to move bills from the Senate to the House and vice versa is Friday. Some committees, including the one charged with reviewing Harrell’s bill, do not plan to meet this week.
Senate Bill 467 suffered a similar fate. The measure by Sen. Bill Cowsert, R-Athens, sought to give parents more control over their children’s access to phone apps.
Other bills have emerged from committee hearings and still have a chance.
Senate Bill 540 by Sen. Jason Anavitarte, R-Dallas, the Senate majority leader, passed a committee last week and could get a vote on the Senate floor before “crossover” day on Friday.
It would empower the state attorney general to fine owners of any “conversational artificial intelligence” application or service that fails to clarify to users that they are not communicating with a human or that fails to implement guardrails against sharing sexually explicit material with children.
Senate Bill 418 by Sen. Max Burns, R-Sylvania, also got the nod from a Senate committee last week. Like Hatchett’s bill, it would hold people to account if they were to manipulate and distribute a person’s image in a sexually explicit way. Senate Bill 488 by Sen. Ed Setzler, R-Acworth, also passed out of committee last week. It would allow liability lawsuits against product sellers who expose minors to artificial intelligence that was “not merchantable and reasonably suited to the use intended.”
And the House could pass its own measure by Friday.
House Bill 566 by Rep. Soo Hong, R-Lawrenceville, would ban artificial intelligence knockoffs of licensed voices and likenesses.
Many of the measures found support from religious groups but opposition from free speech advocates and technology companies.
Industry lobbyists complained about cost and asserted that the legislation would put users’ private information at risk of exposure.
Justin Hill, a representative from the tech trade association NetChoice — the group that tied up Georgia’s 2024 law in court — said at a hearing about the app store age legislation that companies want to do more to protect children.
“They recognize this has been a problem,” he said. “They’re making it a priority, and I would just encourage you to allow the free market to fix this problem.”
Harrell, the Democrat who led the committee that studied how to protect children online, said the Legislature has not fielded strong enough measures.
“We did nothing to help parents monitor their kids’ online activities, we did nothing to make social media and gaming less addictive for kids, and we did nothing to address design features that promote connecting kids with adults who might use them for sexual exploitation,” she said. “There is so much more to do, but we are up against some serious monied interests.”
At a hearing last week, Anavitarte was clear-eyed about the opposition to his bill and the others that would restrain the tech industry. He was the lead co-sponsor of the legislation that established the 2024 law that NetChoice blocked with a lawsuit.
“All these laws are going to get caught up in federal court just like when we wrote Senate Bill 351,” he said. “If I think that it’s not, then I’m being foolish.”