Tag: ftc

This FTC Workshop Could Legitimize the Push for Online Digital ID Checks

In January 2026, the Federal Trade Commission plans to gather a small army of “experts” in Washington to discuss a topic that sounds technical but reads like a blueprint for a new kind of internet.

Officially, the event is about protecting children. Unofficially, it’s about identifying everyone.

The FTC says the January 28 workshop at the Constitution Center will bring together researchers, policy officials, tech companies, and “consumer representatives” to explore the role of age verification and its relationship to the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act, or COPPA.

It’s all about collecting and verifying age information, developing technical systems for estimation, and scaling those systems across digital environments.

In government language, that means building tools that could determine who you are before you click anything.

The FTC suggests this is about safeguarding minors. But once these systems exist, they rarely stop where they start. The design of a universal age-verification network could reach far beyond child safety, extending into how all users identify themselves across websites, platforms, and services.

The agency’s agenda suggests a framework for what could become a credential-based web. If a website has to verify your age, it must verify you. And once verified, your information doesn’t evaporate after you log out. It’s stored somewhere, connected to something, waiting for the next access request.

The federal effort comes after a wave of state-level enthusiasm for the same idea. Texas, Utah, Missouri, Virginia, and Ohio have each passed laws forcing websites to check the ages of users, often borrowing language directly from the European Union, Australia, and the United Kingdom. Those rules require identity documents, biometric scans, or certified third parties that act as digital hall monitors.

In these states, “click to enter” has turned into “show your papers.”

Many sites now require proof of age, while others test-drive digital ID programs linking personal credentials to online activity.

The result is a slow creep toward a system where logging into a website looks a lot like crossing a border.

Keep reading

AI Giants Under Fire: Child Data EXPLOITATION?

On September 11, 2025, the FTC announced formal orders compelling seven tech giants to disclose detailed information about their consumer-facing AI chatbots. The companies under scrutiny include Alphabet (Google), Meta, OpenAI, Character.AI, Snap, and Elon Musk’s xAI. This action represents one of the most significant regulatory interventions into the AI industry since these platforms exploded in popularity following ChatGPT’s 2022 launch.

The timing raises questions about why previous administrations allowed these potentially dangerous technologies to proliferate unchecked for years. While American families watched their children become increasingly isolated and dependent on AI interactions, federal regulators stood by as Big Tech harvested unprecedented amounts of personal data from minors. The investigation should have begun the moment these companies started targeting children with addictive AI experiences designed to maximize engagement and profit.

Protecting Our Children From Digital Predators

The FTC’s inquiry specifically examines how these companies measure, test, and monitor potential negative impacts on children and teenagers. This focus comes after mounting evidence that AI chatbots can cause psychological harm, particularly among vulnerable young users who may develop unhealthy emotional dependencies on artificial relationships. The investigation also scrutinizes how companies monetize user engagement and process the sensitive personal information children share with these systems.

Parents across America have watched helplessly as their children retreat into conversations with AI entities that collect every intimate detail shared in confidence. These companies have essentially created digital environments where children reveal their deepest fears, desires, and personal struggles—all while sophisticated algorithms analyze this information for commercial purposes. The potential for manipulation and exploitation is staggering, yet these platforms operated with virtually no oversight until now.

Tragedy Sparks Overdue Investigation

The investigation gained urgency following a lawsuit against OpenAI after a teenager’s suicide was allegedly linked to ChatGPT interactions. This tragic case highlights the real-world consequences of allowing unregulated AI systems to interact with emotionally vulnerable young people. The lawsuit raises disturbing questions about whether these companies adequately warn users about potential psychological risks or implement sufficient safeguards to prevent harm.

Character.AI, specifically designed for extended conversations with AI personalities, presents particularly concerning risks for children seeking emotional connection. Young users often treat these AI characters as real friends or confidants, potentially replacing genuine human relationships with artificial substitutes. The long-term psychological impact of these interactions remains largely unknown, yet millions of children engage with these platforms daily without meaningful parental controls or safety measures.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Throws Out 90-Year-Old Precedent, Allows Trump To Fire FTC Commissioner

Chief Justice John Roberts issued an administrative stay Monday that has effectively put a 90-year-old Supreme Court precedent on the brink of being overturned. The ruling, made without explanation on the court’s emergency docket, allows President Donald Trump to proceed with his firing of Federal Trade Commission (FTC) commissioner Rebecca Kelly Slaughter, despite a lower court and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals having blocked the action just last week.

The decision has significant ramifications for the independence of federal agencies and could pave the way for President Trump to fire Federal Reserve Board member Lisa Cook.

A Battle Over Executive Power

The legal battle centers on the 1935 Supreme Court case, Humphrey’s Executor v. United States, which held that a president can’t fire officials at independent agencies for mere policy disagreements. The precedent established that “cause” for removal must be based on “inefficiency, neglect of duty, or malfeasance in office.”

Last week, both U.S. District Judge Loren AliKhan and a majority of the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals had sided with Slaughter, finding that the circumstances of her firing by the Trump administration “almost identically mirror” the facts of the Humphrey’s Executor case. The D.C. Circuit majority, comprised of Judges Patricia Millett and Cornelia Pillard, stated that doing anything but reinstating Slaughter “would be to defy the Supreme Court’s decisions that bind our judgments.”

Keep reading

Utah, FTC target adult websites over alleged child sex abuse material distribution

The State of Utah and Federal Trade Commission targeted the owner and operator of some of the world’s most popular adult content websites over alleged distribution of child sex abuse material (CSAM) and non-consensual material (NSM).

In proposed consent order, state and federal officials allege the company, Aylo, knew it had “hundreds of thousands” of CSAM and NSM videos on its websites. FTC Commissioner Melissa Holyoak and Utah Attorney General Derek Brown both noted that one of Aylo’s employees described one of their own sites as a “gold mine for rape content.”

“Utah stands ready to protect our children from exploitation wherever that exploitation takes place. The rise of the internet has unfortunately led to an increasing amount of instances of child exploitation,” said Brown. “It’s no longer limited to the dark web. Predators can find it more and more on regular sites.”

Despite knowing the alleged content on its site, the complaint alleges Aylo ignored “hundreds of red flags” and deceived consumers about the removal of the videos, allowing for consumers to unknowingly engage with illegal content.

Keep reading

Biden Judge Blocks FTC Investigation Into Far-Left Media Matters

A federal judge on Friday shut down the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) investigation into far-left Media Matters.

US District Judge Sparkle Sooknanan, a Biden appointee, issued an injunction against the FTC and blocked its investigation into Media Matters.

The judge said the Trump Administration illegally retaliated against Media Matters.

“This case presents a straightforward First Amendment violation,” judge Sparkle Sooknanan wrote.

In May, the Federal Trade Commission launched an investigation into Media Matters for America, the far left group that targets conservative media outlets and personalities to put them out of business.

Media Matters for America is funded by the top Democrat Megadonors who value their work.

Soros-funded Media Matters and several leftist groups like Sleeping Giants run by Matt Rivitz have been harassing American corporations for years to quit advertising with conservative platforms, websites and businesses. The Gateway Pundit has been a prime target by these leftist groups and government agencies.

In May 2022, CNN published a hit piece on Elon Musk and Twitter. The article was the far left’s attempt to sway advertisers from posting ads on Twitter.

Elon Musk exposed the culprits behind the coordinated attacks on X’s advertisers – Media Matters. CNN even admitted that Media Matters sent out a threatening letter to Twitter advertisers to quit paying for ads on the platform.

Elon Musk announced in November 2023, that his company X-Corp will be filing a “thermo-nuclear” lawsuit against Media Matters “the second court opens on Monday.”

Elon added that he will sue “Their board, their donors, their network of dark money, all of them…”

In his statement, he released earlier this year, Elon accused Media Matters of creating a fake account that then curated the posts and advertising appearing on the account’s timeline to misinform advertisers about the placement of their posts.

The FTC in May announced that it would open an investigation into the far-left advocacy group for their coordinated attacks on X and its advertisers.

The US Federal Trade Commission demanded documents from Media Matters about its coordination with other leftist groups to rid X of its advertisers.

Keep reading

Federal Trade Commission Sets Sights On Transgender Procedures On Kids

The Federal Trade Commission is setting its sights on the industry pushing transgender medical procedures on minors, documents obtained by The Daily Wire show, a potential major step in the Trump administration’s efforts to crack down on radical gender ideology.

The FTC, an agency tasked with protecting American consumers, will hold a day-long workshop in July on transgender surgeries, hormones, and puberty blockers, according to an internal memo obtained by The Daily Wire. That’s a likely indicator of the agency’s intentions: the FTC often holds such events before initiating legal action against an industry to gain information, gather evidence, and solicit the input of affected Americans.

“Under the Federal Trade Commission Act, the FTC is provided broad authority to protect consumers from unfair and deceptive trade acts and practices,” the memo reads. “There is now considerable reason to believe that the doctors and medical providers pushing [gender-affirming care] on minors are knowingly deceiving parents by exaggerating [gender-affirming care’s] ‘benefits’ and downplaying its harmful side effects.”

The Trump-appointed chairman of the FTC, Andrew Ferguson, reportedly pitched the president on using the agency to fight “against the trans agenda” before he was selected for the post, according to a document obtained by Punchbowl News in December.

Ferguson believed the FTC could “investigate the doctors, therapists, hospitals, and others who deceptively pushed gender confusion, puberty blockers, hormone replacement, and sex-change surgeries on children and adults while failing to disclose strong evidence that such interventions are not helpful and carry enormous risks,” Punchbowl reported.

The FTC declined to comment for this story. But the leadership, contents, and guests of the proposed workshop — “The Big Lie: The Dangers of Gender-Affirming Care for Minors” — strongly indicate that the commission plans to make good on those promises.

Keep reading

FTC probes Media Matters over Musk’s X boycott claims, document shows

The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has demanded documents from Media Matters about possible coordination with other media watchdogs accused by Elon Musk of helping orchestrate advertiser boycotts of X, according to a document seen by Reuters on Thursday.

The civil investigative demand seen by Reuters seeks information about Media Matters’ communications with other groups that evaluate misinformation and hate speech in news and social media, including a World Federation of Advertisers initiative called Global Alliance for Responsible Media. X has ongoing lawsuits against both organizations.

The probe marks an escalation in U.S. government scrutiny of whether groups like Media Matters helped advertisers coordinate to pull ad dollars from X after Musk bought the social media site formerly known as Twitter in 2022.

The demand seeks all documents Media Matters, a Washington, D.C.-based liberal advocacy group, has produced or received in the X lawsuit related to advertiser boycotts.

FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson, who was appointed by President Donald Trump to run the agency, highlighted the potential for a probe in December.

“We must prosecute any unlawful collusion between online platforms, and confront advertiser boycotts which threaten competition among those platforms,” Ferguson said in a statement on an unrelated case.

The U.S. House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Republican member Jim Jordan, accused the Global Alliance for Responsible Media last year of coordinating an illegal group boycott. The initiative was shut down in August.

A spokesperson for the FTC declined to comment.

Keep reading

A Top Antitrust Enforcer Is Open To Prosecuting People Who Disagree With Him

The Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Mark Meador recently insinuated that his agency may investigate nonprofits and academic institutions that object to antitrust enforcement actions without disclosing their donors for deceptive practices. While Meador may think it’s OK to probe parties for disagreeing with him, the FTC’s consumer protection remit does not sanction prosecuting those who reject the commissioner’s antitrust ideology.

Meador recently reposted a video of him discussing the “academic whitewashing” of antitrust during an event hosted by American Compass and the Conservative Partnership Institute on May 1. (While no full recording of the event exists at press time, an employee of American Compass tells Reason that the clip is from the aforementioned event.)

Meador complains about academics “renting out their Ph.D. [and] their reputation to advocate for the interests of giant corporations.” He rightly acknowledged that people are free to do whatever they want but then said that the FTC brings “enforcement actions against influencers and reviewers who advocate for products without disclosing that they’re being paid for it.”

Meador wondered aloud whether nonprofit employees and academics who advocate “for the interests of certain corporations or mergers in their white papers and their op-eds without ever disclosing that they’re being paid to do so” may also be guilty of deceptive practices. He did not state that the FTC would bring enforcement actions against academics but said it’s “worth investigating.”

While Meador may think “it’s an interesting question” whether he may prosecute his ideological opponents, the Supreme Court has already provided an answer. Eugene Volokh, professor emeritus at the University of California, Los Angeles School of Law, understands the ruling in NAACP v. Alabama (1958) as holding that, “when it comes to speech that is neither commercial advertising for a product…nor specifically election-related, broader First Amendment precedents would indeed preclude such disclosure requirements.”

Nadine Strossen, former president of the American Civil Liberties Union and senior fellow at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression, tells Reason that “the Supreme Court has expressly distinguished between commercial and other communications.” Citing Zauderer v. Office of Disciplinary Counsel of Supreme Court of Ohio (1985), Strossen says “compulsory disclosure regarding non-commercial expression is presumptively unconstitutional.”

Keep reading

Hands Off My Social Media!

Democrats have found a new superstar to help get out the progressive vote: Federal Trade Commission (FTC) Chair Lina Khan. Khan has done town halls with Representatives Raja Krishnamoorthi (D-IL) and Mark Pocan (D-WI), Senate candidate and current Representative Ruben Gallego (D-AZ), and Vermont Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT).

Khan’s appearances are official government events—not campaign rallies. However, politicians would not appear at an event in an election year unless they where sure it would appeal to a key constituency. It may seem odd that politicians would consider it helpful to appear with an FTC chair. However, Lina Khan is no ordinary agency head. Khan has been a star in progressive circles since, while still a law student, she penned “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox.” This article argued that the rise of Big Tech companies like Amazon and Google required government to take a more aggressive approach to antitrust. Khan has brought high-profile antitrust cases against Amazon and META (parent company of Facebook, Instagram, and What’s App), as well as attempts to block mergers and acquisitions in areas ranging from  handbags to grocery stores.

Khan advocates a “holistic” approach to antitrust that recognizes how “workers and independent businesses, in addition to consumers, can be harmed by antitrust and consumer protection violations.” She has also called for the FTC to consider how certain business practices can help facilitate antitrust violations. This holistic approach gives federal antitrust enforcers justification for second-guessing almost any decision made by almost any American business.

The FTC chair has a number of fans on the “populist-nationalist” right. These “Khanservatives” want Republicans to embrace a Lina Khan-like approach to antitrust. Khanservatives want to use antitrust to punish Big Tech for manipulating their algorithms to suppress conservative news and opinions. Some Khanservatives believe the Big Tech companies influenced the outcome of the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections.

The most prominent Khanservative is Republican vice presidential nominee JD Vance. Senator Vance (R-OH) has publicly praised Khan and, before being picked as Donald Trump’s running mate, suggested that if Trump returns to the Oval Office he should “use the administrative state” to advance a conservative agenda. Senator Vance has also called for the government to break up Google because “the monopolistic control of information in our society resides with a progressive company.”

Keep reading

FTC finally investigates John Deere’s creepy repair restriction scheme

Deere caught in headlights — the US Federal Trade Commission is finally investigating farm equipment giant John Deere over its questionable repair policies. The company has made a habit of making it extremely difficult to outright impossible for its customers to repair the Deere products that they themselves own. This infringement on a customer’s right to repair is now being scrutinized by the guys in charge. Oh happy day!

Reuters reports that the probe “focuses on repair restrictions manufacturers place on hardware or software.” According to Reuters, Deere “signed a memorandum of understanding with the American Farm Bureau Federation last year that would allow farmers to fix their equipment, or go to a third-party repair shop.” The investigation will examine whether Deere violated the Federal Trade Act’s section 5, which “prohibits unfair or deceptive practices affecting commerce.”

Keep reading