Snapchat Lawsuit Meets Resistance from Utah Over Child Protection Rules

Utah officials say Snap Inc. is trying to get out of age verification, parental consent and curfew rules, while Snapchat argues the laws violate First Amendment rights and are rehashed old versions of laws that have been struck down.

Salt Lake City, November 6, 2025 — The state of Utah asked a federal judge to dismiss the lawsuit filed by Snap Inc., the parent company of Snapchat, against the state’s new social media child protection laws.

Attorney General Derek Brown and Katie Haas, director of the Utah Department of Commerce Consumer Protection Division, said Snapchat has filed the federal suit to avoid enforcement while related cases are pending in state and appellate courts. The state asked the federal court to abstain from hearing the matter until those cases are resolved.

Jimmy Rock, a Utah attorney with Edelson PC, says Snapchat is trying to get out of accountability through multiple lawsuits.

“There is one side trying to avoid the effect of court decisions,” Rock says. “It is not the state. It is Snap.”

Snapchat Pushes Back

Snap’s attorney, Rush Atkinson, says the company should not defend the same issue in multiple courts. He referred to the 2024 federal case, NetChoice v. Reyes, in which a federal court struck down Utah’s earlier Social Media Regulation Act (2023), now pending before the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

He further argued that the new law is a reworded version of previously struck-down regulations, and Snap should not face repeated litigation for the same rights.

“Snap should not have to jump from one court to another defending rights already recognized,” he says. “The law remains the same, and the analysis remains the same.”

Snap also claims the regulations violate First Amendment rights of minors and adults and place unnecessary burdens on platform users. The company asks the federal court to prevent Utah from pursuing enforcement actions or investigations while the matter remains unresolved.

Judge Jill Parrish, an Obama appointee, however, seemed skeptical of Snap’s arguments. She noted that the federal and state cases are different, and the state court should handle this one. She said it’s forum shopping and that Utah’s enforcement and Snap’s operations need to be adjudicated in state court before any federal court can get involved, emphasizing that it’s up to the state court to decide.

The case centers around Utah’s Minor Protection in Social Media Act (2024), which replaces the 2023 Social Media Regulation Act that was struck down in federal court. Previously, the law required:

• Age assurance for all social media users
• parental consent for minors
• Curfews restricting minors at night and early morning

The State’s stance on Snapchat was that the platform allegedly allows predators and drug dealers to use the app. They also claimed that the platform exploits children’s psychological vulnerabilities through experimental AI and engagement-focused features for profit.

The case is about the national debate over child protection online vs free speech. Utah says its laws are necessary to protect minors. On the contrary, Snap says they overreach and infringe on constitutional rights.

This is the latest in a series of lawsuits in Utah as states and social media companies figure out the balance between innovation, free speech, and youth safety.