404 Media

2026-08-04 17:41:56

The SCREEN Act is a Christian Nationalist Nightmare

On Wednesday morning, Ted Cruz’s Senate Commerce Committee will convene on five bills aimed at age verification and “child safety.” The bills each have their own issues when it comes to privacy, data collection, parental rights, and free speech. But one bill, the partisan Republican SCREEN Act, is a Christian nationalist nightmare.

Utah Senator Mike Lee introduced the Shielding Children's Retinas from Egregious Exposure on the Net (SCREEN) Act in February 2025, alongside exclusively Republican cosponsors and supporters Senators John Curtis, Jim Banks, and Representative Mary Miller.

The SCREEN Act would require every website that includes even one piece of what the legislation describes as “harmful to minors” to verify visitors’ ages. It defines “harmful to minors” as content that “depicts, describes, or represents, in a patently offensive way with respect to what is suitable for minors, an actual or simulated sexual act or sexual contact, actual or simulated normal or perverted sexual acts, or lewd exhibition of the genitals;” is “obscene” or “child pornography;” or “appeals to the prurient interest in nudity, sex, or excretion.”

Unlike the many laws now in place around the U.S. that apply to sites made up of at least one third adult content, like porn sites and some social media platforms, SCREEN would place the burden and risk of verifying users’ ages to every website on the internet that falls under the law, which would be most sites with user-generated content and also mainstream entertainment platforms like Netflix. It also attacks virtual private networks (VPNs) by requiring sites to verify based on IP addresses; many people in states that have age verification laws in place use VPNs to get around submitting sensitive personal data like ID and biometrics to a smattering of third-party websites in use today. Critics say the SCREEN Act would be a privacy and free speech disaster.

And the agenda of its sponsors is clear: “Internet pornography has infected our culture and corroded the vulnerable minds of America’s kids, with the average age of initial exposure being 12 years old. That’s appalling,” Banks said in Lee’s press release.

A number of religious, conservative, Christian nationalist, and anti-pornography groups are in support of the bill, according to the press release from Lee’s office. They include the National Center on Sexual Exploitation (which recently represented a Kansas mother who sued multiple porn sites because her son found her old laptop and used it to watch Chaturbate), the National Decency Coalition, the Ethics and Public Policy Center (which is “working to apply the riches of the Jewish and Christian traditions to contemporary questions of law, culture, and politics,” according to its website), the Family Policy Alliance (whose stated mission is to “advance biblical values through civic engagement”), the Family Research Council (whose “mission is to serve in the kingdom of God by championing faith, family, and freedom in public policy and the culture from a biblical worldview”), and many more.

Heritage Action, a conservative lobbying group and one of the organizations Lee lists in support of the SCREEN Act, is a sister organization to the Heritage Foundation, which authored Project 2025. Heritage Action “works with lawmakers to implement Heritage Foundation solutions,” according to the Heritage Foundation website. This is important because of how Project 2025, the playbook for right-wing and extremist conservative leadership, has influenced policies and lawmaking in America in the last few years of the Trump Administration. That stretches from attacks on programs that promote diversity, equity and inclusion, to attacks on trans and queer people, to turning the FBI into a political entity.

Half of the US Now Requires You to Upload Your ID or Scan Your Face to Watch Porn
Missouri’s age verification law, enacted on November 30, is the halfway mark for the sweep of age verification laws across the country.
404 MediaSamantha Cole

One of Project 2025’s stated goals is to redefine and eradicate pornography: “Pornography, manifested today in the omnipresent propagation of transgender ideology and sexualization of children, for instance, is not a political Gordian knot inextricably binding up disparate claims about free speech, property rights, sexual liberation, and child welfare. It has no claim to First Amendment protection,” the playbook says, calling for imprisonment of pornographers but also educators and librarians. “And telecommunications and technology firms that facilitate its spread should be shuttered.”

The Senate Commerce Committee will also debate and mark up the text of the Youth AI Privacy Act which would require chatbots to disclose they’re not human among other features like limiting data retention; the CHATBOT Act which would require AI companies to build “family account” systems where parents can monitor kids’ activity; the Children’s Artificial Intelligence Toy Safety Act which would create a federal study into toys that include AI components; and the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA).

KOSA would impose a legal “duty of care” on social media platforms to prevent and mitigate promotion of suicide, eating disorders, substance abuse, sexual exploitation, and advertisements for products like tobacco. KOSA has been introduced, and failed, multiple times since its first introduction in 2022; it has bipartisan lawmaker support but is extremely unpopular across all sides of the political spectrum among groups that care about freedom of speech because of its potential to increase censorship.

New Bill Would Make All Pornography a Federal Crime in the U.S.
Republican Senator Mike Lee introduced Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (again) last week, which would criminalize porn at the federal level.
404 MediaSamantha Cole

“Whatever disclaimers and exceptions the bill includes, the practical effect is unchanged,” the Electronic Freedom Foundation recently wrote about KOSA. “When platforms face liability for content that someone later claims contributed to harms like anxiety, eating disorders, or substance use, the safest response is to remove lawful speech or shut down forums discussing those topics altogether.”

Unlike KOSA and many of the other age verification laws that have spread across the country, the SCREEN Act does not have bipartisan support. It’s the latest in Lee’s repeated attempts to criminalize content he and his co-sponsors personally consider immoral. Last year, Lee introduced the now-stalled Interstate Obscenity Definition Act (IODA) for the third time. IODA would change the 1973 “Miller Test” for determining what qualifies as obscene, and seeks to make all pornography illegal at the federal level. “Obscenity isn’t protected by the First Amendment, but hazy and unenforceable legal definitions have allowed extreme pornography to saturate American society and reach countless children,” Lee said in a press release. “Our bill updates the legal definition of obscenity for the internet age so this content can be taken down and its peddlers prosecuted.”

New Bill Would Make All Pornography a Federal Crime in the U.S.

^{Samantha Cole (404 Media)}

404 Media

2026-07-21 17:17:45

What Does Olive Garden’s Never-Ending Pasta Have to Do With Voting Rights?

When I was 20 years old, I went to my hometown Olive Garden with one goal in mind: For less than $10, I would attempt to eat so much bottomless pasta in their so-called Never-Ending Pasta deal that either the staff would be forced to stop me and my idiot friends from putting the franchise into the red, or I would die trying. In either scenario, I planned to get a serious bang for my buck. No one asked to see my ID.

I ate a ton of linguine alfredo (probably four bowls — not heroic and definitely not financially devastating to Olive Garden), shamefully tapped the mat, and went back to my friends’ place to smoke too much weed. The next morning, on the four hour drive back to my college town, I started feeling a burning, cramping pain in my abdomen. By that evening, I was curled up in pain and could barely walk. I drove myself to the emergency room, confessed my sins, and learned I had a handful of gallstones that the buckets of creamy, fatty, carby pasta had aggravated into an attack.

Should I have been carded before carrying out such a reckless crime against my own wellbeing? Maybe. But this week, right-wing groups and Republicans have started repeating a lie that Olive Garden’s promotional deals are more secure than the country’s elections.

I’m telling this humbling story because this morning, a clip of Republican Congressman Steve Scalise went viral where he claimed Olive Garden is more secure than the voting system of the United States of America. On a CNBC Squawk Box segment, the House Majority Leader said, "For God's sake, you can't get pasta at Olive Garden without a picture ID! Why not be able to show a picture ID to vote?” He was speaking in support of the Safeguard American Voter Eligibility Act (SAVE) Act, which conservatives have been attempting to pass since 2024 and would require voters to show specific kinds of government-issued identification at the polls.

A lot of people, myself included, have been dunking on Scalise’s comment. Of course you don’t have to show ID to eat pasta at Olive Garden under normal circumstances, unless you’re doing something especially 18+ to the pasta, at which point I assume they’d just throw you out anyway. Right? But this line — the polls are less secure than an Olive Garden — is something Scalise is repeating from many Republican leaders who want to see the SAVE Act pass. Mike Lee, Eli Crane, Todd Rokita and RNC-affiliated groups have repeated this line on social media over and over in the last few days. It’s a false equivalence, of course, but nowadays, unlike in my naive youth, you do actually have to show ID to access Never-Ending-Pasta-land.

They’re all talking about it because Olive Garden brought back Never-Ending Pasta on July 16, and this time around, it requires you to show an ID that matches your “pasta pass,” I assume to prevent people from trying to never-endingly feed a big table with one deal. “The Never-Ending Pasta Pass is only for use by the Passholder whose name is printed on the Pass,” Olive Garden wrote on X, in response to someone asking if they could use it for their family. “Passes are personalized and non-transferable. Passholders must present a valid photo I.D. along with the Pass at the time of ordering.”

No. The Never-Ending Pasta Pass is only for use by the Passholder whose name is printed on the Pass. Passes are personalized and non-transferable. Passholders must present a valid photo I.D. along with the Pass at the time of ordering.
— Olive Garden (@olivegarden) July 16, 2026

404 Media’s Matthew Gault went directly to the source: an Olive Garden on his lunch break today. He said he had to speak to three employees, who he described to me as “confused and frightened,” before getting an answer about Olive Garden’s pass system. “The [pasta pass] card doesn't come back until the end of August, they have no idea how it's gonna work,” he said.

I reached out to Darden Restaurants, which owns Olive Garden, to see if they could provide more clarity or comment on the situation. I’ll update if I hear back.

Voting rights experts say the SAVE Act would severely and unnecessarily restrict everyone’s voting rights, not just people who don’t hold ID. “Every American, including people who have been registered for decades, would need to appear in person at an election office with qualifying documents,” nonpartisan voting rights nonprofit Vote.org says in a FAQ about the act. “Online voter registration, which 42 states currently rely on, would be upended or eliminated. Mail registration would end entirely. Voter registration drives would become functionally ineffective, since they depend on reaching people at events and public spaces where no one carries a passport or birth certificate.”

Simply having a driver’s license or other form of photo ID wouldn’t be enough. The SAVE Act requires a valid U.S. passport or passport card, a certified birth certificate paired with a photo ID, a naturalization certificate, or a Consular Report of Birth Abroad, Vote.org explains. If you have a different name today than what’s on your documents — for example, if you got married and changed your last name — you could also have to show your marriage certificate or other documentation.

Voting rights advocates agree that election fraud is not currently a widespread concern. But ahead of the midterms, the Trump administration has been rekindling false conspiracies about election fraud, fake ballots, and foreign interference.

Some Republicans are pushing back on the SAVE Act, too. Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski wrote in an op-ed that the act would severely chill voting rights in Alaska because of its vast geography and limited election infrastructure. Alaska is a stark example, but this would be the case in much of the rest of the country, too.

We can discuss the chilling effects of Olive Garden’s vague and potentially confusing identity verification requirements another day. At least it’s probably more secure and less privacy-invasive than a lot of the age verification laws in place in most of the country today.

Age Verification Laws Drag Us Back to the Dark Ages of the Internet

Invasive and ineffective age verification laws that require users show government-issued ID, like a driver's license or passport, are passing like wildfire across the U.S.

^{Emanuel Maiberg (404 Media)}

404 Media

2025-03-25 14:27:34

Texans Might Soon Have to Show Photo ID to Buy a Dildo Online

A newly introduced bill in Texas would require online sellers to show a photo ID before buying a dildo.

SB 3003, introduced by Senator Angela Paxton (wife of Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton), would criminally charge online retailers for selling “an obscene device” without verifying the buyers’ age. Sellers would have to require customers to submit their government-issued photographic identification, or use “third-party age verification services that use public records or other reliable sources to verify the purchaser's identity and age,” the bill says. Owning a credit card, which already requires the holder to be over 18 years of age, would not be enough.

Like the regressive and ineffective adult site age verification laws passing all across the country in the last few years, this law would drag Texans back to a not-so-distant time when sex toy sellers had to pretend vibrators were for “massage.”

Hallie Lieberman, journalist and author of Buzz: A Stimulating History of the Sex Toy, sold sex toys in Texas in the early 2000s under the state’s “six dildo” law, which criminalizes the possession of six or more “obscene devices,” defined as "a device including a dildo or artificial vagina, designed or marketed as useful primarily for the stimulation of human genital organs." That law is still on the books but is now considered unenforceable and unconstitutional. Lieberman told me sellers got around the law by claiming the toys were for “medical purposes.” This bill could send retailers back to that time.

“I can see something like that happening again, with people saying on their sex toy store websites that vibrators are for back massage and butt plugs are for rectal strengthening,” Lieberman said. “It's similar to how sex toys were marketed in the early 20th century to get around obscenity laws and the Comstock Act (which unfortunately still exists and may be used to prevent access to contraceptives and sex toys nationwide.) Butt plugs were sold as cures for asthma and vibrators for sciatica. We are literally going back in time with this law.”

Age Verification Laws Drag Us Back to the Dark Ages of the Internet
Invasive and ineffective age verification laws that require users show government-issued ID, like a driver’s license or passport, are passing like wildfire across the U.S.
404 MediaEmanuel Maiberg

Lieberman told me she had to call the clitoris “the man in the boat” at the time to avoid breaking the law. “When we can't speak openly about our bodies and sexual pleasure, when we're forced to use euphemisms, we not only are under informed about our bodies, but we also feel shame in seeking out pleasure,” she said.

Like age verification laws for websites, the bill would make buying sex toys online harder for everyone, not just minors, and would send consumers to less-safe retailers with lower-quality, possibly dangerous toys. And also like those laws, people who do upload their government ID or undergo other age verification measures could risk having their purchases exposed to a hostile government.

“The government should not have a record of what sex toys we buy. This isn't just a frivolous concern,” Lieberman said. “In a nation where the president has declared that there are only two genders and that transgender people don't exist, where trans people are erased from government websites and kicked out of the military, it would be dangerous for the government to have a record that you purchased sex toys designed for trans people. Imagine you're a school teacher at a public school in Texas and there's a record you purchased a sex toy designed for queer people in a state where a parental bill of rights bill was just passed prohibiting discussion of sexual orientation in schools.”

"We are literally going back in time with this law."

Texas legislators have been trying to limit access to sex toys for their constituents for years. In late 2024, Hillary Hickland, a freshman member of Texas’ Republican House, introduced a bill that would ban retailers in the state from selling sex toys unless they file paperwork to become sexually oriented businesses—effectively forcing stores like Walmart, CVS and Target, which sell vibrators and other sex toys, to take those products off their shelves and forcing brick-and-mortar boutiques to verify the ages of all customers. The bill was referred to Texas’ Trade, Workforce & Economic Development committee earlier this month.

Paxton’s bill would charge online retailers with a Class A Misdemeanor if they don’t verify ages, and would open them up to fines up to $5,000 for each violation.

Paxton did not respond to a request for comment.

Age Verification Laws Drag Us Back to the Dark Ages of the Internet

Invasive and ineffective age verification laws that require users show government-issued ID, like a driver's license or passport, are passing like wildfire across the U.S.

^{Emanuel Maiberg (404 Media)}