Summary#

ACR-224 is an enacted California Assembly Concurrent Resolution; it does not amend an existing statute. It designates June 23, 2026, as Social Media Harms Victim Remembrance Day, with the stated goal of honoring people harmed by social media and raising awareness.

• It names one date in 2026; it does not establish an annual remembrance day.
• It urges individuals, communities, organizations, and social media platforms to observe the day with activities such as remembrance ceremonies, educational events, and advocacy.
• It calls on nonprofit organizations and other stakeholders to work together on initiatives addressing social media harms, including digital literacy, online safety, and victims’ rights.
• These are requests and statements of commitment, not mandatory duties. The resolution creates no office, program, funding, or enforcement power.

What it means for you#

• Individuals, communities, organizations, and social media platforms: The resolution asks you to observe the designated day, but does not require you to hold an event or take other action.
• Nonprofit organizations and other stakeholders: It calls on you to collaborate on initiatives, but does not set up a process, assign specific tasks, or require participation.
• General public: It does not change anyone’s rights, duties, or access to social media services.

Money#

No cost information is provided in the available material.

• The resolution does not provide funding or set fees. Any costs of voluntary events or initiatives are not specified.

What is unclear#

• The resolution does not define “social media harms” or specify who qualifies as a victim or survivor.
• It does not identify who would lead or coordinate the proposed collaboration, or how initiatives would be chosen or carried out.
• It does not set a recurring date or establish ongoing activities after 2026.
• The resolution was filed on August 12, 2026, after its designated date of June 23, 2026.

Case for#

• The resolution gives public recognition to people who have been harmed and to their families.
• A designated day could provide an occasion for remembrance and public discussion.
• The requested activities and initiatives could draw attention to digital literacy, online safety, and support for victims.

Case against#

• The resolution does not require action, fund initiatives, or create a service for victims; its practical effects depend on voluntary efforts.
• It does not specify how collaboration would work or how anyone would know whether initiatives were carried out.
• The designated date had passed before the resolution was filed, and the text does not set a future date.