
Written by Sutherland Institute
May 2, 2025
SALT LAKE CITY (May 2, 2025) – Sutherland Institute released the following statement from Constitutional Law and Religious Freedom Fellow Bill Duncan today, in response to Sen. Mike Lee’s (R-Utah) introduction of the App Store Accountability Act in the U.S. Senate:
“We welcome the introduction of this common-sense measure to protect parents’ ability to help their children navigate online commerce. Utah recently became the first state to adopt similar safeguards. This bill provides an appropriate and constitutional way to empower parents who want to help their children avoid harmful apps and unfair service contracts.
Critics will likely argue that this proposal violates the right of free speech. In fact, it does not address content at all, thus respecting the First Amendment. The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld laws that prohibit businesses from providing material that is harmful to minors, and states routinely enforce such laws by requiring identification when minors attempt to make certain purchases. This approach simply ensures that minors cannot enter into contracts with app providers without their parents’ knowledge and supervision. In a confusing online world, parents appreciate this kind of help.”
Bill is available for press interviews. Contact Nic Dunn at 801-349-5961 or nic@sifreedom.org.
###
Media Contact:

More Insights
Read More
Working paper on history of parent-driven education points toward reforms
Parents and policymakers alike may find the paper useful in understanding education policy, where we are likely headed, and what we should do next.
Will AI kill us in 10 years? | Chris Koopman & Ford Copple
Is AI really on track to destroy humanity, or are we confusing small risks with science fiction? On this episode of Defending Ideas, Nic Dunn sits down with Chris Koopman, CEO of Abundance Institute, and Ford Copple, tech policy analyst at Sutherland Institute, to discuss the growing debate over AI safety, regulation, data centers, and technological innovation.
Massachusetts case raises concerns about government cutting parents out of children’s decisions
When parents pose a threat to children’s safety, the state should act. But ideological disagreements are not a reason to cut parents out of a child’s life.

