Utah’s law targeting youth social media access won’t go into effect as originally scheduled. U.S. District Court Judge Robert Shelby issued a preliminary injunction on Sept. 10 halting it from being enforced on the grounds it probably violates the First Amendment.
The law, which passed earlier this year, would have required social media companies to verify the ages of users and have “maximum default privacy settings” on the accounts of Utah children. It also put other requirements on social media companies. It was a scaled-back version of a 2023 law.
The judge’s order is in response to a lawsuit by NetChoice — a trade association representing internet companies like Google, which owns YouTube, and Meta, the parent company of Facebook and Instagram. The group challenged the law’s constitutionality and asked for a preliminary injunction.
“The court recognizes the State’s earnest desire to protect young people from the novel challenges associated with social media use,” Shelby wrote in his decision.
“But owing to the First Amendment’s paramount place in our democratic system, even well-intentioned legislation that regulates speech based on content must satisfy a tremendously high level of constitutional scrutiny. And on the record before the court, [the] Defendants have yet to show the Act does.”
Shelby also wrote that NetChoice was “substantially likely to succeed” on its free speech claim because the law imposes content-based restrictions on social media companies’ speech. The law was scheduled to go into effect Oct. 1. The preliminary injunction means it will be on hold while the case is sorted out in court.
Utah lawmakers and other leaders like Gov. Spencer Cox, have repeatedly spoken about the harms social media apps have on the mental health of young people. They said this law would help curb those negative effects.
In his order, Shelby wrote that while “the court is sensitive to the mental health challenges many young people face, [the] Defendants have not provided evidence establishing a clear, causal relationship between minors’ social media use and negative mental health impacts.”
NetChoice has also sued other states over similar laws.
In a statement, Chris Marchese, director of the NetChoice Litigation Center said, “Utah’s law not only violates the First Amendment, but if enforced, would backfire and endanger the very people it’s meant to help. We look forward to seeing this law, and others like it, permanently struck down and online speech and privacy fully protected across the country.”
In July, the same judge dismissed one claim in NetChoice’s argument against the law, giving Utah lawmakers a partial court win based on changes made to the law. At the time, they acknowledged that the First Amendment remained a concern.
“We’re disappointed in the district court’s decision preliminarily enjoining Utah’s Minor Protection in Social Media Act,” said Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes in a statement. “The AG’s office is analyzing the ruling to determine next steps. We remain committed to protecting Utah’s youth from social media’s harmful effects.”
The legislators who sponsored the law also said they won’t back down.
“These apps are aggravating an already growing mental health crisis, especially among young people, and the data underscore the need to take action,” Republican Sen. Mike McKell said in a statement
“While disappointed by this ruling, Utah will continue to lead the nation in this fight against social media's harmful impacts on the unsupervised industry while providing parents with more resources, tools and controls.”
In his statement, Republican Rep. Jordan Teuscher also expressed disappointment but highlighted a separate law that will allow Utahns to sue social media companies if a child’s mental health is negatively impacted by excessive social media use. It takes effect Oct. 1.
Despite the court order, Teuscher believes in the strength of the state’s legal arguments.
“We owe it to Utah's families and, most importantly, to our children, to continue this fight. The stakes are too high. We will press forward, confident that the courts will ultimately recognize the constitutionality of this law, and we will not rest until every safeguard is in place to ensure a safer, healthier future for Utah’s youth.”
In the same order, Shelby dismissed similar claims brought by individual Utah social media users. He wrote they lacked standing because the law was aimed at social media companies and not users.
