> I never hear that assumption debated directly.

The idea of the "nanny state" has been debated a lot, and this seems like a very literal example of that. But once some status quo is firmly entrenched, debate about it tends to die down because the majority of people no longer care enough about it.

The point of having a state at all is to create a framework where people are set up to succeed.

Everyone shouldn't have to lose their privacy just because you're too lazy to use parental controls or give your kids devices that are made for children.

Entering your child's age when you create their user account is a loss of privacy?

The current bills (e.g. NY one at https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2025/S8102/amendm... ) require age assurance that goes beyond mere assertions, so when creating your (adult) user account it would be required to give away your privacy to prove your age - if you can't implement a way for anonymous/pseudonymous people to verify that they indeed are adults (and not kids claiming to be so), these bills prohibit you to manufacture internet-connected systems that can be used by anonymous/pseudonymous users.

We are also talking about the Illinois one, which doesn't do that

Where exactly are you getting that goal of a state from? Maybe that's one of the goals today, historically I don't think it was anywhere on the list.

Then frankly you haven’t seen many debates around age verification as it’s the main thing discussed every time it’s brought up

You are correct, I didn't pay close attention to any EU debates that may have happened, I haven't lived there in years. In the US I haven't seen much debate at all, regardless of the bill really we don't seem to have leaders openly and honestly debate anything.