Congress opens social media platforms to lawsuits over algorithmic harms
H.R. 6266 — Algorithm Accountability Act · Filed by Mike Kennedy (R-UT) · 1 cosponsor · Introduced Nov 21, 2025 · Referred to committee
Your members of Congress
Enter a ZIP to see where your representative and both senators stood on this bill.
Looked up on this device — your ZIP is never stored on our servers.
What it does
This bill amends Section 230 of the Communications Act to hold social media platforms liable for harms caused by their recommendation algorithms. Platforms with over 1 million users must exercise 'reasonable care' in designing and operating algorithms to prevent foreseeable bodily injury or death. Users harmed by algorithmic recommendations can sue platforms directly for compensatory and punitive damages, and arbitration agreements cannot block these lawsuits.
Why we flagged it
The bill's core function is to carve out a narrow exception to Section 230 immunity, creating a private right of action for bodily injury caused by algorithmic recommendations. This is a targeted regulatory reform, not a blanket repeal of Section 230.
- Amendments to Trademark Act (Section 45), Title 18 USC (Section 2421A), Webb-Kenyon Act (Section 3), and Title 31 USC (Section 5362) updating cross-references to Section 230. These are conforming amendments, not substantive riders.
- Multiple statutes amended solely to update their references to the redefined 'social media platform' term. Boilerplate technical housekeeping, not policy riders.
4 unrelated provisions were flagged in total.
What the text implies
- Platforms may respond by degrading algorithmic recommendations entirely, reverting to purely chronological feeds, which could reduce content discovery and user engagement — a hidden cost to user experience.
- The 'reasonable care' standard is undefined and will be litigated extensively, creating years of legal uncertainty and potentially inconsistent rulings across circuits before standards crystallize.
- Punitive damages exposure may incentivize platforms to over-moderate or suppress edge-case content (mental health resources, harm-reduction information) out of fear of liability, even when the content itself is beneficial.
- The carve-out for chronological feeds and direct user search may create perverse incentives: platforms could shift toward less-curated, less-moderated feeds to avoid liability, potentially increasing exposure to harmful content.
- Small platforms (under 1M users) and niche services are exempt, creating a competitive advantage for smaller competitors and potentially fragmenting the social media market.
Who it affects
Ordinary users gain a direct legal remedy against platforms for algorithmic harms (self-harm, violence, harassment) that Section 230 currently shields. The 'reasonable care' standard is a modest duty that does not ban algorithms or speech, only negligent design. However, litigation costs and uncertainty may cause platforms to over-moderate or degrade service quality for some users.
Who stands to gain
- plaintiff's personal injury bar
- class action litigation firms
- legal services sector
Named in the bill
Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934, social media platforms, recommendation-based algorithms, Trademark Act of 1946, Title 18 USC Section 2421A, Webb-Kenyon Act, Title 31 USC Section 5362, FTC (implied enforcement authority), district courts
Where it stands
1 cosponsor: 1 Democrats.
- Nov 21, 2025 — Introduced · Congress.gov: “Introduced in House”
- Nov 21, 2025 — Referred to House Committee on Energy and Commerce · Congress.gov: “Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce”
Dates and quoted wording are Congress.gov's action record; the timeline shows status changes, not every procedural step.
Money around this bill
2 lobbying clients named this bill on 3 disclosure filings across 2 quarters, Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. Those filings disclosed $3,390,000 in lobbying spend. A filing names 27 bills on average, so that figure is what each filing reported, not a share belonging to this bill.
More lobbying clients named this bill than 41% of bills with at least one filing.
Mike Kennedy, the sponsor, reported $532,000 in PAC receipts in the 2026 cycle.
- Entertainment Software Association — $2,810,000 on 2 filings
- Ebay Inc. — $580,000 on 1 filing
Lobbying Disclosure Act filings through Jul 20, 2026. A filing shows who paid to lobby on a bill it names, not what changed.
How this was measured
Analysis — Quorum's AI read the full bill text on Jun 8, 2026; transparency and hidden-provision scores are compared against the median of 16,222 analysed bills.
Status and sponsors — Congress.gov's bill record — actions, committee referrals and cosponsors — loaded nightly. The timeline shows status changes, not every procedural action.
Money — Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act filings whose specific-issue field names this bill for quarters ending Dec 2025 to Jun 2026. A filing's amount is reported whole beside the median number of bills a filing names; it is never divided across them. PAC receipts are FEC-reported contributions to the sponsor's candidate committee in the 2026 cycle.
As of — lobbying records through Jul 20, 2026 · page rendered 2026-10-20.
“Congress opens social media platforms to lawsuits over algorithmic harms” QuorumCivic. https://share.quorumcivic.app/bill/119/hr6266 Report an error
The week in bills
One email, Sunday: what Congress passed, what it changed, and who paid.
One link arrives to confirm the address. It is used for this email and nothing else, and every issue carries an unsubscribe link.