- A tech group is suing Utah over a law requiring age verification for apps.
- The lawsuit claims the law violates First Amendment rights by imposing speech restrictions on app stores.
- The lawmaker behind the bill defends its constitutionality; says it aims to protect children and teens online.
SALT LAKE CITY — A technology industry group is suing Utah, claiming its law requiring that app stores verify the ages of users before they download smartphone applications amounts to "censorship" and violates the First Amendment.
The Computer and Communications Industry Association filed a complaint in federal court on Thursday against Utah Attorney General Derek Brown and the director of the state's Division of Consumer Protection, seeking to block the state from enforcing the law.
The lawsuit comes after a similar law in Texas was halted by a U.S. District Court, which found it likely violated free speech protections, according to the Texas Tribune.
"This Utah law raises many of the same constitutional concerns that caused another court to block the Texas app store law," said Stephanie Joyce, the association's senior vice president. "When a state erects a barrier to the vast library of online speech unless the speaker jumps through a series of age-gating hoops, it must receive exacting constitutional scrutiny."
Utah's law "warrants judicial intervention to ensure that adults and young people can continue to access the lawful online speech of their choice," she added.
The law in question, the App Store Accountability Act, was approved by lawmakers last March. Portions of the law have already taken effect, and the age-verification requirements for app stores are scheduled to take effect on May 6.
The lawsuit claims the act infringes on the free speech rights of app stores and developers. It said the age verification provisions impose a "prior restraint on speech by forcing private actors to interpose and enforce the state's access gates on all manner of protected speech." It also takes issue with requirements that app stores provide age ratings for apps, which it said "effectively compel(s)" developers and app stores to "engage in subjective and potentially controversial speech."
Sen. Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, sponsored the bill last year and said it aimed to protect children from potentially harmful content and from entering into contracts with app developers without parental consent.
"You would never let your child or your grandchild enter into a legally binding contract, and yet, we parents are doing this every day by allowing our children to carry around smartphones with apps that can be easily downloaded," he said last year, referring to privacy agreements and other terms many apps require.
Some opponents of the bill raised concerns that it would amount to an unconstitutional restriction on free speech, but Weiler said he didn't think it is "any less constitutional than asking for an ID at a 7-Eleven when you buy a six-pack of beer."
Weiler defended his bill as constitutional in a statement to KSL Thursday, saying, "Utah is all too familiar with Big Tech's evasion tactics used to avoid accountability."
"It regulates contracts and disclosures between multibillion-dollar corporations and children," he said. "Parental rights are not up for debate. I am proud this law has the support of hundreds of child safety and advocacy organizations across the country. I look forward to winning this tech lawsuit and delivering greater tools for Utah parents to protect their kids in our digital world."
When asked about the lawsuit Thursday, House Speaker Mike Schultz, R-Hooper, said he was "disappointed" in Big Tech and accused social media platforms of "trying to get kids addicted to apps."
"I think age verification makes sense and I think putting parents in control makes sense," he said. "I'm really disappointed in the technology companies."
Brown, Utah's attorney general, who was named in his official capacity, said he would "vigorously defend state law against legal challenges."
The lawsuit contains nine claims against Utah, including violations of the First and 14th Amendments and the Commerce Clause of the Constitution. It was filed in the U.S. District Court in the District of Utah.
