It's official: Utah is the U.S. state closest to banning VPNs

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Utah’s new law targeting age-restricted sites prohibits them from explaining how to use VPNs to bypass age checks and may effectively pressure commercial VPN providers to block users in the state, even though VPNs are not formally banned. Commenters argue this likely conflicts with the First Amendment and is technically impractical, while also warning it fits into a broader pattern of “age verification” being used to erode online privacy, anonymity, and encryption. Others note that although users can often route around such measures, the real impact will fall on ordinary residents, businesses, and vulnerable people who rely on VPNs and secure access, and that similar laws are rapidly spreading across multiple U.S. states.

Scope of the Utah Law & Clickbait Concerns

  • Many note the title “closest to banning VPNs” is clickbait: the law does not outlaw VPNs.
  • It targets sites covered by Utah’s age‑verification rules:
    • They may not explain how to use VPNs to circumvent age checks.
    • They must enforce age verification for users physically in Utah, even if those users appear virtually elsewhere.
  • Some argue this “indirectly” pressures commercial VPNs to block Utah or weakens VPN utility; others say calling that “close to banning” is misleading.

Constitutionality and Free Speech

  • Numerous commenters see a clear First Amendment problem in banning sites from giving VPN circumvention info.
  • Others compare it to bans on counseling crimes; you can teach neutral skills but not instruct illegal acts.
  • There is skepticism that courts—especially the current Supreme Court—will reliably strike it down, particularly under “protect the children” rationales.
  • Chilling effects and the cost/time of litigation are seen as part of the harm even if parts are later invalidated.

Enforcement & Technical Feasibility

  • Several argue enforcement is technically impossible without undermining VPNs or mandating location leakage.
  • EFF’s position (linked) is cited: censorship will be trivially bypassed by savvy users via private tunnels, proxies, etc., while ordinary users and businesses suffer.
  • Others counter that relying on technical workarounds has lulled people into complacency; censorship elsewhere has had real effects.

Broader Surveillance and Age Verification Context

  • Many see this as one piece of a larger, coordinated, global move toward:
    • Mandatory age verification.
    • OS‑ or silicon‑level identity binding.
    • An internet where anonymity is effectively gone and states can mass‑monitor with AI.
  • Some label this an existential threat to civil liberties; others point to earlier structural threats (e.g., money in politics) as at least as serious.

Federalism, Mobility, and Utah Politics

  • One camp praises US federalism: 50 policy “experiments” and the option to move.
  • Others stress moving is financially and socially prohibitive for many; coordinated model bills across states reduce real choice.
  • Utah is described as a mix of:
    • Attractive landscapes and some pro‑freedom policies (e.g., “free‑range parenting”).
    • A dominant conservative/religious political culture that has overridden voter initiatives (medical marijuana, redistricting).

Impacts and Proposed Responses

  • Expected collateral damage: businesses, journalists, and abuse survivors relying on VPN privacy.
  • Some advocate:
    • Geoblocking Utah to force backlash.
    • Legal challenges and donations to digital‑rights groups.
    • Political engagement rather than assuming technology alone can “route around” bad laws.