Law / United States / 
Utah
SB 194 (2024), Utah Minor Protection in Social Media Act, and HB 464 (2024), Social Media Amendments
Utah Code Ann. sections 13-71-101 to 13-71-401
A social media and minors rule binding private bodies.
- Age threshold
- 18
- Covered services
- Social media companies as statutorily defined operating in Utah.
- How the hook was established
- express
- What makes it apply
- Data subject residence
- Obligation class
- Age verification, Consent, Design code, Data subject rights, Security
- Audit expectation
- none
What it requires
- If you are a social media company operating in Utah, implement an age assurance system for Utah account holders.
- Apply default protections for known minors.
- Let verified parents supervise a minor's account.
These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text. Also read by: NetChoice, LLC v. Reyes, No. 2:23-cv-00911-RJS-CMR (D. Utah ) (recorded ).
If you get it wrong
Criminal exposureNo
Private right of actionYes
Penalty structure
Administrative fine or court-ordered civil penalty of up to $2,500 per violation of the Act, imposed by the Division of Consumer Protection or a court; a separate civil penalty of up to $5,000 per violation applies to violating an administrative or court order issued under the Act.
- Rule
- Per violation only
- As of
- Currency
- USD
- Per violation unit
- Violation
- Per violation amount
- 2,500
Statutory damages
A prevailing plaintiff recovers the greater of $10,000 for each adverse mental health outcome incidence or actual damages, plus reasonable attorney fees and court costs, under the companion private right of action for algorithmically curated social media harm enacted by HB 464 (2024).
- As of
- Currency
- USD
- Per person minimum
- 10,000
Who enforces it
Enforcement body
Utah Division of Consumer Protection
Litigation
- Court
- U.S. District Court for the District of Utah, on appeal to the Tenth Circuit
- Docket
- NetChoice, LLC v. Reyes, No. 2:23-cv-00911 (D. Utah); appeal No. 24-4100 (10th Cir.)
- Posture
- Preliminarily enjoined on on First Amendment grounds. The state's appeal was argued before the Tenth Circuit in November 2025 and remains pending as of this date, and the district court has stayed further proceedings pending that decision.
Settledness
The preliminary injunction of against the whole Act is the latest order read.
- As of
- Case link
- https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-utd-2_23-cv-00911/pdf/USCOURTS-utd-2_23-cv-00911-1.pdf
- Case citation
- NetChoice, LLC v. Reyes, No. 2:23-cv-00911-RJS-CMR (D. Utah )
- Under challenge
- Yes
- Open questions
- How does a social media company show that its age assurance system reaches the accuracy rate of 95% that section 13-71-101 requires, when section 13-71-302 leaves the criteria to rules of the Division of Consumer Protection?
- Which services are social media services under the Central Coverage Definition of section 13-71-101, given that the court found it substantially likely to be content based because it sorts websites by the social subject matter of what they distribute?
What it makes you log
What the log must hold
Age assurance result
Logging duty
The chapter uses no word like log or record. It requires a social media company to run an age assurance system, to review documentary evidence submitted on an appeal of an age designation and decide within 30 days, to segregate the personal information gathered within the age assurance system, and, to keep the safe harbor in 13-71-302(2), to implement and maintain a system that complies with the Division's rules; none of that can be shown without a record of the determinations and the evidence reviewed. Section 13-71-201(4) bars using the segregated information for any other purpose except those in 13-71-204(4)(a) to (f).
- Kind
- Implicit
- As of
- Provision
- Utah Code Ann. sections 13-71-201(3) and (4) and 13-71-302(2)
- Trigger
- age_assurance
What this law does
Would require social media companies to implement an age assurance system for Utah account holders, apply default protections for known minors, and let verified parents supervise a minor's account. HB 464 additionally repealed Utah's original 2023 Social Media Regulation Act and created a private right of action for a minor's mental health harms tied to a platform's algorithmically curated feed.
How courts have read itPremium data
Our analysis of this law draws on 1 court ruling.
What each ruling held, what it means for an app, and whether it still stands are premium data, in the Plus, Pro and Enterprise plans.
When LexLint raises it
When your app profile says your app operates a social platform.
Back to the example · Lint your app
Page updated .