Utah defends social media child protection laws against Snapchat suit

(CN) — The state of Utah asked a federal court judge on Thursday to dismiss a Snap Inc. lawsuit seeking to prevent the state from enforcing new laws aimed at protecting children from social media companies.

Utah Attorney General Derek Brown and Katie Haas, director of the Utah Department of Commerce Consumer Protection Division, accused Snapchat and its owner Snap Inc. of filing a new lawsuit in federal court to avoid the state’s enforcement of new social media laws while there is still pending civil enforcement in different courts.

They asked the federal court to abstain from hearing any of Snapchat’s challenges to the Utah social media laws while those cases are ongoing.

“There is one side in this case that is trying to avoid the effect of court decisions,” argued attorney Jimmy Rock, of D.C.-based law firm Edelson PC, representing the state of Utah. “It is not the state. It is Snap.”

Snapchat’s attorney, Rush Atkinson of D.C. law firm Dunn Isaacson Rhee, argued that the matter had already been decided in federal court in the 2024 case Netchoice v Reyes , which ruled against Utah’s social media law and is now in the 10th Circuit Court of Appeals.

“Why we have come to this court is because Snap should not be required to engage in serial litigation to defend its own rights,” Atkinson argued to U.S. District Court Judge Jill Parrish. “It has vindicated through this court its First Amendment rights. It shouldn’t have to switch to state court and do it all over again.”

However, Parrish, a Barack Obama appointee who appeared via Zoom videoconference, often interjected with pointed questions and criticisms of the plaintiff’s arguments. Parrish didn’t agree that the federal court’s previous decision had any weight on the state court litigation.

“It’s apples and oranges," she told Atkinson. “Why isn’t it appropriate to just let them litigate it in the state court? It seems to me that’s completely appropriate. Maybe I’m going too far, but it seems to me that what you’re doing here actually borders on blatant forum shopping.”

It did not make sense to try and conduct additional analysis considering that there were factual disputes and accusations that still needed to be adjudicated in the state court, she added.

“We are suggesting that what Snap is entitled to is not having to jump around and defend itself on the same issue in multiple jurisdictions,” he said. “This court should feel like it should extend the protections in a common sense way from litigation from last year and not allow re-litigation of the issue in state court.”

Atkinson also said the state is simply rewording the same regulations that have already been litigated in favor of social media companies. It’s the same analysis, because it’s the same social media ban, he said.

Attorneys did not respond for comment after the hearing ended.

The hearing is the most recent tangle in a series of related court cases in Utah state, federal and appeals courts after the Utah Legislature enacted the 2023 Social Media Regulation Act. A federal judge ruled against the state on that act, but a similar law was passed in 2024, the Utah Minor Protection in Social Media Act, which replaced it.

Utah officials have taken particular aim at Snapchat in recent years, accusing the social media company of facilitating a platform used by sexual predators and drug dealers. They also accuse Snapchat of using what it described as experimental AIand exploiting the psychological vulnerabilities of children for profit.

The state law required age verifications, parental consent and curfews for minors, among other things.

The social media app is perhaps best known for popularizing social media “stories,” or media that disappears from a user’s profile after 24 hours.

Snapchat argues that the new social media laws in Utah are too burdensome and will affect the First Amendment rights of teenagers, as well as adults, who use the platform. In its complaint, Snapchat asked the court to prevent the state from suing the company or launching investigations into it.