Last year marked an influx of legislation aimed at limiting children’s access to the internet and social media. State and federal lawmakers, eager to “do something” proposed a range of measures, from outright banning minors’ access to social media to requiring platforms to verify users’ age. We have written at length about the risks that these policies pose to the First Amendment, the privacy of all users involved, the overall ineffectiveness of such proposals to actually keep kids safe online, and the contradictions to deeply held principles of limited government.

Far from solving the issues that often arise in the digital age, restrictive measures suppress free speech and usurp sensitive information, counteracting their stated goals. The immediate victims of such hastily composed laws are obvious: social media, internet users, and children in particular. Regardless, a fresh batch of age verification bills hovers on the horizon of 2025. Lawmakers, insistent upon pursuing ill-fated bills despite their constitutional and safety risks, should consider the burden it places upon taxpayers.

Because age verification mandates stand on shaky legal ground, they are inevitably challenged in court. Last week, a district court blocked a Texas law, the SCOPE Act, that would have required social media companies to verify the age of every user. This trajectory is a familiar one; the Taxpayers Protection Alliance reported on cases in Mississippi, California, Arkansas, and Ohio which followed the same pattern.

If the unconstitutional bills were blocked, why does this matter? States spend millions of taxpayer dollars every year to fund litigation efforts. When lawmakers prioritize political agendas and buzzy regulations over sound and sustainable Constitutional theory, the citizens shoulder the financial strain. The price tag of defending age verification legislation for months to years in court is poor stewardship at best.

Alaska, Hawaii, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Utah, and more states are pursuing age verification legislation this year. If the pattern of past efforts proves true, they have signed their citizens up to fund a long legal battle with tenuous success. This approach to keeping kids safe online is a costly hill to die on—particularly when more pragmatic, effective solutions are available.

The Pelican Institute has released a comprehensive parent guide to protect youth on social media. The guide is an actionable resource for parents and caregivers that encourages ways to know, monitor, and connect with their children as they navigate the internet and social media. Other organizations, like the American Enterprise Institute, have also compiled tools to create a plan that works best for families. The best part about these approaches? They’ll actually work. The second best benefit? They won’t cost a taxpayer dime.

If considering the free speech implications and the risk to children’s privacy is not enough to persuade lawmakers to refrain from hasty regulation, perhaps they will think twice before asking taxpayers to split the bill.