The bill was motivated by concerns about app stores that other regulations don’t address. First, the age ratings on some apps are inconsistent with the actual content, leading users to believe that the content provided by an app is safer than it really is. Second, some app downloads come with contractual obligations (like automatic recurring charges or access to the user’s content) not appropriate for minors.
Utah’s bill addresses these concerns. It requires app stores (and developers as relevant) to verify a user’s age when that person sets up an account; to require minors’ accounts to be connected to a parent’s account; to verify parental consent before a minor makes a purchase or downloads an app; and to limit unnecessary gathering of data beyond what’s needed for the verification. It also prohibits knowingly misrepresenting information about app content made available to parents. If a minor is harmed by an app store or developer’s violation of these requirements, the minor or a parent can bring a civil suit for damages as well as costs and attorney fees.
At least a dozen other states are considering similar legislation, and an “App Store Accountability Act” was introduced in Congress at the end of 2024.
The Utah bill has some important features that make it a possible model for other states and the national government. For instance, the bill only requires app stores to use available technologies that are “reasonably designed to ensure accuracy” or that follow specifications that will be provided by the state’s Division of Consumer Protection. This allows for flexibility in a field where technologies are developing.
The bill also addresses the conduct of app stores and developers rather than trying to address specific content that could raise free-speech concerns. This is analogous to how states handle similar limits on minors’ access to potentially harmful substances, such as tobacco and alcoholic beverages, by checking identification.
And by allowing parents to enforce its provisions in civil suits directly, the bill does not tax state or local resources in the same way a more complicated criminal enforcement process would.
The bill has proved to be very popular with the public. Polling data from our organization, the Sutherland Institute, and Y2 Analytics found that Utah voters strongly supported the legislation across age, education and ideology differences. Only one member of the Utah Senate and three members of the state House voted against it.
It is a good policy that offers a big step toward a safer online experience. Leaders throughout the nation should respond accordingly.
William C. Duncan is the constitutional law and religious freedom fellow for the Sutherland Institute, an independent nonpartisan public-policy think tank in Salt Lake City.
Governing’s opinion columns reflect the views of their authors and not necessarily those of Governing’s editors or management.
