Republican lawmakers introduced legislation last week that could give the federal government a more stringent grasp of some technology platforms while mitigating government scrutiny of artificial intelligence.

The Republican-led House Energy and Commerce Committee budget settlement bill was proposed Tuesday and will enable the federal government to update IT systems and use AI systems in the Department of Commerce. The bill will also cease the ability to enforce AI regulations over the next decade to enable the U.S. AI market to grow and research.

Despite some politicians' skepticism and criticism of AI, the Trump administration has been seeking to encourage growth in the U.S. AI industry without any guardrails.

On Friday, to end Donald Trump's trip to the Middle East, the government announced a deal with the United Arab Emirates to build a large data center in the country that will serve U.S. tech companies.

Despite Republicans’ efforts to protect AI, lawmakers have also proposed bills that will tighten some tech companies’ regulations.

Two of the bills can set rules for the technology platform and its users to make it more restrictive for children who are safer online.

On May 8, Senator Mike Lee of R-Utah proposed the Interstate Definition of Obscene Act (IODA), which will update the “definition of obscene laws in the Internet age,” Lee said in a statement.

IODA was first introduced in 2022 and again in 2024, but failed to become law.

IODA will change the definition of obscene, which applies three aspects of testing to content to "attract any thing of interest in nudity, gender, or excrement" and "describe, describe, or represent actual or simulated sexual behavior, with objective sexual behavior to arouse a person's sexual desire, or satisfy a person's sexual desire."

Currently, it is illegal to transmit obscene content via telecommunications if it is used as harassment or abuse. The bill would remove the requirement for “intention”, meaning it could criminalize any obscene content spread by telecommunications systems.

Although the bill lacks bipartisan support or other records, it has attracted attention online and in the media, languages ​​that may allow pornography to be prosecuted under laws related to obscenity. But law supporters hope it will prevent children from watching lewd and obscene content.

Currently, social media platforms are granted “Finity” immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Model Act of 1996, meaning that with a few exceptions, they are legally responsible for most content posted on the website. Although Lee's press release on IODA does not specify who will be legally responsible for the new obscene content, the bill aims to create a unified definition of obscene, so it is easier to identify and prosecute obscene content.

"Obscene is not protected by the First Amendment, but the hazy and inoperable legal definitions allow extreme pornography to saturate American society and attract countless children," Lee said in the statement. "Our bill updates the legal definition of obscene in the Internet era, so this content can be removed and its hawkers can be sued."

On Wednesday, the Senate reintroduced the Double Party Children’s Online Safety Act (KOSA), which will hold websites responsible for hosting content that is harmful to children if they host.

Kosa was first made by R-Tenn in 2022. Marsha Blackburn and D-Conn. Richard Blumenthal introduced but failed to show up from the conference hall. During the 2023-2024 Congressional term, Kosa was introduced again and amendments were made to address concerns about the vague wording in the bill. In July, Kosa passed in the Senate, but by the end of 2024, it did not move forward in the House.

The latest version of KOSA notes that the bill will require social media platforms to “remove addictive product features”, allowing parents to exercise more control and supervision of their children’s social media, create responsibility for the platform to mitigate content focusing on topics of suicide and poor diet, and need transparency from social media platforms to share the steps they have taken to protect children.

Those who favor the bill say it will put the platform legally responsible if harmful content that minors should not view. Opponents say this may inadvertently affect websites that are entrusted with LGBTQ content. They also fear that this could lead to more online censorship.

“Sponsors claim that the latest version will not review online content. That’s not the case. The bill still sets out a censorship that disguises itself as a “custody obligation” that will be threatened on previous versions: curbing legal speeches online, especially young people, especially for young people,” Joe Mullin, senior policy analyst, is a senior policy analyst at the Electronics Leading Foundation.

However, the update to the bill helps make it less scoped and eliminates the general ability of lawyers to sue the platform. It also makes it more precise to expect social media and other website protection damage. This has led to some opponents of the bill changing its position.

The bill was reintroduced by Senate Majority Leader John Thune, and DN.Y. Minority Leader Chuck Schumer. Last year, the bill passed 91-3 in the Senate but died in the House. The current bill has been supported by Apple and Republicans, including Trump and Elon Musk.

In a statement, Timothy Powderly, Apple's senior director of government affairs for the Americans, said the company would be happy to support the bill, adding that everyone can play a role in ensuring children's online safety. He also acknowledged concerns about Xhosa and praised the senators for their efforts to improve the bill.

“Privacy as a fundamental right long-term advocate for privacy is important, and we believe these improvements are important and hopefully the first step in comprehensive privacy legislation to ensure everyone’s privacy rights online.”

Critics have delayed both bills because some say they may be giving over-regulated speeches online.

Matt Navarra, a social media consultant and analyst who has worked with companies such as Google, the U.S. and the UK government, said bills, especially KOSA, could have a significant impact on social media platforms and the way people use them. Navarra said KOSA will force the platform to “rethink recommendation engines, notifications, data tracking for work for minors.”

“For engagement-driven platforms like Tiktok or Instagram, it’s a fundamental shift – it’s not just the scope that’s allowed, it’s about how addictive and immersive experiences are redesigned or removed,” he said. “So Kosa is no longer content policing, but about algorithmic detox, especially for teenagers.”

If IODA becomes law, adults may also see significant changes in online access.

“In terms of what people are paying attention to the bill, especially near censorship, Kosa does introduce a care obligation that sounds good in theory, but can actually push the platform towards over-adjusted or flattened deletions to avoid risks,” Navarra said. “And the obscene bill is more packaged.”