Posted Mar Posted originally on CTH on 11, 2026 by Martin Armstrong |  

Congress is once again advancing legislation under the banner of protecting children online, and whenever government begins framing policy in moral language, it usually means something far more intrusive is being constructed beneath the surface. The latest push on the Kids Online Safety Act centers on mandatory age-verification systems that would require online platforms to verify users’ age before allowing access to content.

If companies are required to confirm a user’s age, they must collect identifying information. That means uploading government IDs, facial scans, biometric verification, or some form of identity credential simply to access websites or social media platforms. The open internet that once allowed individuals to communicate anonymously has suddenly become an identification checkpoint.

Privacy organizations and digital rights advocates have already warned that these requirements pressure websites to collect enormous amounts of sensitive personal information just to allow ordinary speech online. Once these databases exist, they become irresistible targets for hackers, governments, and corporate data collection. The same institutions that routinely suffer massive data breaches now want citizens to upload even more sensitive identification simply to read information or participate in discussions.

Even regulators themselves are quietly acknowledging the contradiction. Officials have admitted that these verification systems require collecting personal data in ways that could conflict with existing privacy protections for children. Yet the legislation continues moving forward because the political incentives are obvious. No politician wants to be seen opposing a bill marketed as protecting children.

This is exactly how surveillance infrastructure has historically developed. It never begins with governments announcing they want to monitor citizens. Instead, it begins with policies designed to address social problems. Once the identification systems are built, the infrastructure remains permanent. What starts as age verification inevitably becomes identity verification for broader purposes.

The implications for speech are enormous. Anonymous communication has been part of political culture for centuries. The Federalist Papers themselves were written under pseudonyms. The internet extended that tradition globally by allowing individuals to exchange ideas without fear of retaliation from governments, employers, or political movements. Age-verification mandates fundamentally change that structure by requiring users to link identity credentials to online participation.

Governments have repeatedly demonstrated they cannot secure large databases. Massive data breaches occur every year across both public agencies and private corporations. Expanding identity verification requirements only increases the amount of sensitive information circulating across already-vulnerable systems.

Once platforms are required to verify identity or age, that framework can easily be expanded to regulate speech, political content, financial activity, or access to information. The infrastructure becomes permanent even if the original justification fades away. The internet began as an open communications network where individuals could exchange information freely across borders. Requiring identification to access information transforms that environment into a monitored space where participation depends on presenting credentials.