Sen. Jim Banks introduces federal bill requiring age verification on pornography websites

Sen. Jim Banks, R-Ind., introduced legislation on Tuesday that would force pornography websites to verify users' ages before granting access to sexually explicit content, a federal push that builds on a wave of more than 25 state-level laws already on the books.

The bill, called the Safety and Age Filtering Enforcement for Kids Act, targets commercial entities that distribute pornography online. It would extend enforcement authority to the Federal Trade Commission under consumer protection law and authorize the Department of Justice to investigate platforms that knowingly violate the statute. Parents and legal guardians would also gain the right to sue companies that fail to comply.

Banks framed the measure as a straightforward parental-rights issue. Fox News Digital reported that his office described the legislation as backed by a "broad coalition of organizations and advocates," including Heritage Action, the American Principles Project, the Institute for Family Studies, the National Decency Coalition, the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission, and Concerned Women for America.

The numbers behind the push

The case for federal action rests heavily on one data point that should alarm every parent in the country. A 2023 national survey by Common Sense Media found that 73 percent of teen respondents aged 13 to 17 had watched pornography online. Over half, 54 percent, said they first viewed it by the time they turned 13. Fifteen percent reported first exposure at age 10 or younger.

The average age of first viewing was 12.

Those figures describe a landscape in which children can stumble into, or deliberately seek out, hardcore material with virtually no barrier. Two-thirds of LGBTQ+ teen respondents in the same survey said they viewed pornography intentionally, a detail that underscores how easily minors of all backgrounds navigate sites that make no serious effort to screen out underage users.

Banks put the problem in plain terms in a statement to Fox News Digital:

"Kids should not be exposed to pornography with just a few clicks. The SAFE for Kids Act helps parents protect their children and bring commonsense safeguards nationwide."

Heritage Action's Kevin Roberts demands congressional action

Kevin Roberts, president of Heritage Action, offered a sharper statement that linked the issue to a broader cultural fight. Roberts told Fox News Digital that Washington has dragged its feet while children across the nation face explicit material with no meaningful safeguards.

"Congress must act now to protect our children from adult content on the internet. No more excuses. While Washington drags its feet, kids across the nation are being exposed to vile, pornographic images and ads with no meaningful safeguards to prevent it. Americans are angry that their kids are being indoctrinated into a left-wing ideology intended to infiltrate their hearts and corrupt their moral center."

Roberts went further, calling the SAFE for Kids Act "a necessary solution that will finally hold individuals and companies liable if they fail to implement meaningful safeguards to prevent minors from being exposed to explicit content."

That language, holding companies liable, is the enforcement teeth that distinguish a federal statute from a patchwork of state rules that porn platforms can try to dodge by relocating servers or restructuring corporate entities. The bill's private right of action means parents would not have to wait for a federal agency to act. They could take companies to court themselves.

State momentum and the Supreme Court

Banks' office noted that more than 25 states have already enacted age-verification requirements for pornography websites. That state-level momentum has been building for years, driven by Republican legislators and conservative advocacy groups who argue that the internet's default setting, open access, no questions asked, fails children by design.

The legal ground appears favorable. Banks' office pointed to the Supreme Court's decision in Free Speech Coalition v. Paxton, in which the Court upheld age-verification laws and recognized the government's interest in protecting children from sexual material online. That ruling removed a significant constitutional obstacle that industry lawyers had long cited to fight regulation.

With the high court's blessing and a growing roster of state statutes, the question shifts from whether government can require age verification to whether Congress will act at the federal level. The SAFE for Kids Act is Banks' answer.

Terry Schilling, president of the American Principles Project, spoke with Fox News Digital about recent state efforts to force pornography sites to verify users' ages. His organization is among the coalition backing the federal bill, signaling that the conservative infrastructure behind this issue extends well beyond Capitol Hill.

What the bill would do

The legislation's mechanisms are worth spelling out. Commercial entities distributing pornography online would be required to implement age-verification measures before users can access sexually explicit content. The FTC would gain enforcement authority under existing consumer protection law, meaning the commission could treat violations the way it treats deceptive trade practices. The DOJ would be authorized to investigate platforms that intentionally break the law.

And the private right of action would let parents and legal guardians sue. That provision matters because federal agencies have limited bandwidth. Giving families a legal tool of their own creates a second enforcement lane that does not depend on bureaucratic priorities or political will at the agency level.

The bill's supporters clearly see this as a fight worth having within the Republican Party's broader agenda. Republican senators across the country are staking out positions on cultural and family issues that resonate with the party's base, and child safety online ranks near the top of that list.

The gap Congress has left open

For years, the federal government has treated online pornography as a free-speech issue first and a child-safety issue second. The result is an internet where a 10-year-old with a phone can access material that would be illegal to sell to a minor in any brick-and-mortar store in America. No ID check. No age gate worth the name. Just a click-through button that asks, in effect, "Are you 18?", and accepts any answer.

States started filling that vacuum because Congress wouldn't. Now Banks is asking Congress to catch up. The coalition behind the bill, spanning family-policy think tanks, religious liberty organizations, and decency advocates, suggests this is not a fringe effort. It reflects a broad consensus on the right that the status quo is indefensible.

Open questions remain. The bill's text has not been publicly detailed beyond the framework Banks' office described. It is unclear whether the legislation has cosponsors, what specific penalties apply for violations, or how the bill defines the age-verification measures platforms must adopt. Those details will matter when the bill faces committee scrutiny and inevitable industry opposition.

But the direction is clear. More than half the states have moved. The Supreme Court has green-lighted the approach. And the data, 73 percent of teens exposed, average first viewing at age 12, makes the case in terms no parent can ignore.

Washington has spent years pretending this problem would solve itself. It hasn't. The only people who benefit from congressional inaction are the platforms profiting off an audience that includes children.