• A bill pending in the Utah Legislature would require app stores and app developers to verify the ages of users and get parental consent for minors to download or buy apps.
• This bill is intended to protect children from harmful content, violations of their privacy, and the risks to mental health from social media.
• Arguments that the bill could impact free speech or parental rights are baseless.

​In the last few years, Utah has made significant efforts to protect children online. These include a public education campaign about impacts of social media on youth; a lawsuit against TikTok and another against Meta filed by the state’s Division of Consumer Protection; and laws that require age verification for social media use (which is currently being challenged in federal court) and allow lawsuits by youth and parents for those harmed by social media.

This session, the Legislature is considering another law, SB 142, that will address the use of app stores by children and youth.

What does SB 142 do?

The bill requires app stores to verify the ages of users and then connect a child’s account with a parent’s and obtain parental consent for a minor to download or purchase an app. App developers have the same obligations. When an app store violates these requirements, a parent who is harmed by that action can sue the app store or developer.

Why is this bill needed?

Currently, a youth or child can download apps with no specific requirement to verify their age. With access to a credit card, these can even include paid apps. These downloads often involve making an agreement to accept terms which can include allowing access to information on their phones or computers, automatically recurring charges, etc. The apps themselves can give minors access to content and programs that are inappropriate and dangerous.

App stores typically provide ratings for apps that suggest an appropriate minimum age for users, but there is reason to believe these ages are arbitrary and often inappropriate. A child or parent relying on them will not be adequately aware of the risk posed by the app.

Not all apps merely deliver content. They capture data on health, location, contacts, personal data, photos, videos and more. This reality has been recognized by Congress in its TikTok ban, which was recently upheld unanimously by the U.S. Supreme Court.

Of key concern are social media apps. These apps can give children and youth access to harmful content and are associated with serious mental health problems for young people.

Minors cannot legally enter into contracts for good reasons. Our laws recognize that they are vulnerable in ways that adults are not. The right of parents to direct the upbringing of their children are protected for precisely this reason – so they give guidance and direction as their children mature.

What objections are being raised to the bill, and are they valid?

There are two major objections to the proposal that have been raised. The first is that it interferes with freedom of speech. The second is that it would interfere with the rights of parents. Both are a stretch, and the sponsor and supporters have responded to them.

To summarize, the bill does not violate the principle of free speech because:

• It regulates the conduct of selling to minors rather than any expression of a person or organization.
• The right to free speech does not guarantee a speaker the right to an audience, particularly of minors.
• In the context of obscene material, the U.S. Supreme Court has upheld laws that prohibit businesses from providing harmful material to minors.
• States are undoubtedly free to take actions to protect children from harm by requiring age verification for purchases of alcohol or cigarettes and even for the use of tanning beds.
• Thus, even if the law were stretched to treat selling apps as a form of speech, reasonable regulations meant to advance the compelling purpose of protecting children would justify this proposal.

The bill would not interfere with parental rights because:

• The law would increase, rather than restrict, parents’ influence on their children’s choices
• Parents would remain free to approve their children’s app store purchases if they chose.
• There is no right for a parent to be uninvolved in a child’s life.

Given the nature of the risk of social media and other technologies to children, it is eminently reasonable for Utah to ensure parents can be involved in decisions about their use. Some parents may see it as an annoyance to have to approve children’s purposes or to verify their age, but the majority welcome any help they can get in trying to help their children navigate the perilous online environment.