← Back to Section 230 sunset bills introduced in Congress
Timeline timeline/2025-12-section-230-sunset-legislation

Page history

Every change to the Section 230 sunset bills introduced in Congress page: what changed, when it went live, and how it was reviewed.

Changes across the whole site →

Lifecycle

Mar 2, 2026 – today · select a mark to jump to it
  • Writing
  • AI review
  • Fixes
  • Minor upkeep

Changes

  1. Renamed

    Renamed

    Reason
    Not recorded
    Made by
    Not recorded
  2. Edit

    Edited: 4 sources added, 2 sections added

    4 sources added2 sections addedDate changedTitle changed+179 / −14 words
    Reason
    Not recorded
    Made by
    Not recorded
    Show changesHide changes

    BeforeBipartisan Senate bill proposes sunsetting Section 230 by end of 2026, requiring Congress to revise or replace the liability protections.

    AfterBills in both chambers propose ending Section 230's liability protections; neither advances past committee referral. ## The bills Two sunset bills were introduced in December 2025. On December 16, Rep. Harriet Hageman introduced H.R. 6746, the Sunset To Reform Section 230 Act, which would add to Section 230 a subsection providing that the section "shall have no force or effect after December 31, 2026." It was referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. On December 17, Sen. Lindsey Graham introduced S. 3546, the Sunset Section 230 Act, with nine cosponsors from both parties — …

  3. Edit

    Edited: Lawsrulings changed

    Lawsrulings changed
    Reason
    Not recorded
    Made by
    Not recorded
  4. AI review Review 1 of 1

    Reviewed: 1 finding, all fixed

    Tone 1

    Recorded after the fact. The findings were reconstructed later by comparing the page's text, so the reviewer's original reasoning and the model used were not kept.

    Reviewed by
    Not recorded
    Why it ran
    Not recorded
    Text changed
    +9 / −3 words
    Show changes Hide changes
    Tone

    Before “to force reform”

    Why: The phrase "to force reform" is editorializing — it characterizes the legislative intent in a loaded, adversarial way. The bill's stated purpose may be to prompt, require, or compel changes to Section 230, but "force reform" implies coercion and injects an interpretive framing not supported by a neutral description of the legislation. A neutral alternative would be "to require legislative updates to Section 230" or simply "requiring Congress to revise or replace Section 230 protections."

    Full review report
  5. Edit

    Edited: Categories added

    Categories added
    Reason
    Not recorded
    Made by
    Not recorded
  6. Page created

    First version

    14 words
    Reason
    Not recorded
    Made by
    Not recorded
This site is under active development. Content and features may change.