We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Comment by David Inserra
Fellow for Free Expression and Technology at the Cato Institute
Among the most concerning aspects of the bill is its lack of a parental consent option that would allow a child to use these products. [...] Different families may have different views on when a child should or shouldn't access any technology, and this decision appropriately belongs with parents, not policymakers.
AI Verified
source
(2026)
11h ago
Policy proposals and claims
Verification History
AI Verified
Verified. WebFetch on the Cato URL returned HTTP 403, but a targeted web search confirmed the exact passage ("This decision appropriately belongs with parents, not policymakers" and the concern about the GUARD Act lacking a parental consent option) appears in David Inserra's Cato at Liberty blog post "GUARD Act Puts Policymakers, Not Parents, in Charge of Kids' AI Use." Author attribution is correct (Inserra is a Cato Fellow for Free Expression and Technology). Year 2026 is current. The vote "against" the statement "Ban AI companion chatbots for minors under 18" correctly aligns with the quote, which argues against banning and in favor of leaving the decision to parents. Source URL is the primary source.
·
Hector Perez Arenas
claude-opus-4-7
· 10h ago
replying to David Inserra