Tennessee HB 1891 (Social Media)

BadLawTN HB 1891Tennessee, United StatesHigh threat
Enacted; injunction request returned to district court August 2026
  1. Introduced
  2. Passed House
  3. Passed Senate
  4. Became Law

Stage 4 of 4: Became Law

Makes social media platforms verify the age of every account holder in Tennessee and get a parent's consent before anyone under 18 can sign up.

Latest update

Sixth Circuit vacated denial of a preliminary injunction and remanded for reconsideration; the decision did not itself enjoin the law

Read the full billView official bill record

Take action

Learn about the issue and how to make your position known.

Take action on this issue

What it does

Tennessee HB 1891, the Protecting Children from Social Media Act, requires social media platforms to check the age of anyone opening an account and, for users under 18, to get a parent or guardian's express consent first. Verification happens when someone creates an account, or within fourteen days for an existing one. Platforms have to hand parents supervision tools, and the state Attorney General enforces the rules.

What’s at stake

Age checks that started on adult sites now reach the mainstream platforms where people post, read, and organize. Proving your age to open an account means handing over an ID or a face scan, and keeping an account you already have means doing it again.

Our take

Tennessee makes age checks and parental consent conditions of social media access. The Sixth Circuit has required the district court to reconsider the request to block the law; its August 28 decision neither granted an injunction nor finally decided constitutionality.

Timeline

Sixth Circuit vacated denial of a preliminary injunction and remanded for reconsideration; the decision did not itself enjoin the lawLatest

Sixth Circuit heard oral argument

Took effect

Signed by Governor Bill Lee

Sponsors

Rep. William Lamberth, Sen. Jack Johnson

Legal challenges

NetChoice v. Skrmetti

On August 28, 2026, the Sixth Circuit vacated the June 2025 denial of a preliminary injunction and remanded for reconsideration. The appellate decision did not itself grant an injunction or resolve constitutionality.