- Wisconsin Lawmakers Remove Provision Banning VPNs From Age Verification Bill
- The requirement for adult sites to block VPN users has been removed
- Digital rights experts warn that concerns over privacy and free speech remain
Wisconsin lawmakers removed a controversial ban on VPNs in an age verification bill following backlash from residents and digital rights experts.
First introduced in March 2025, Senate Bill 130 (and its Assembly counterpart AB 105) originally required any provider distributing “harmful” material to minors to block all users connecting via a VPN.
Republican Senator Van Wanggaard proposed removing this provision on Wednesday, February 19. The amendment also added “virtual service provider” to the final paragraphs of the bill to clarify that VPN companies themselves are not liable under the law. The Senate welcomed the change, and the Assembly approved it the next day, sending the bill to the governor’s desk for signature.
The move marks a significant victory for privacy in the state and follows an open letter from the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) that called the original proposal a “spectacularly bad idea.”
“This is great news. Politicians heard the concerns and fears of VPN users in Wisconsin that a ban simply wouldn’t work, and removed this section,” Rindala “Rin” Alajaji, associate director of state affairs at the EFF, told TechRadar.
Alajaji warns that the bill as a whole remains problematic, citing potential privacy violations, security risks and restrictions on free speech.
Privacy and freedom of expression still under threat
“It seems like the public advocacy and enforcement really worked. But I want to be clear that the bill remains very problematic even without the VPN provision,” Alajaji told TechRadar.
Like similar age verification laws emerging across the United States, Wisconsin’s bill would require adults and minors to share sensitive personal information with any platform hosting content deemed “harmful to minors.”
This process often involves uploading government IDs, financial records or biometric data, creating highly sensitive databases that experts say are prime targets for data breaches and privacy breaches.
The EFF also argues that the definition of what is “harmful” given in the bill is dangerously broad. As written, any sexually explicit content must be age-restricted if it lacks “serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.” It’s a vague standard that critics say invites excessive censorship, chills lawful speech and leaves companies vulnerable to unpredictable enforcement.
Beyond Wisconsin
Wisconsin isn’t the only state weighing VPN restrictions and age verification laws. Michigan introduced a similar bill last September, although the proposal has yet to gain traction.
Alajaji told TechRadar that Michigan’s bill has only been filed and has not yet been scheduled for a hearing. She views the delay as a “good thing,” given that the bill seeks to go even further by banning the promotion or sale of circumvention tools.
Critics also point to the bill’s troubling definition of content as “harmful to minors,” which controversially includes any reference to transgender people.
If American VPN users are safe for the moment, the situation across the Atlantic is more precarious. British politicians have shown a growing commitment to “closing the VPN loophole” that circumvents mandatory age checks. Prime Minister Keir Starmer recently confirmed that the government could “restrict the age or limit the use of VPN by children” following a three-month consultation period.
Despite concerns from UK users, the prospect of UK restrictions could inadvertently strengthen the global case against such bans. Alajaji suggests that a UK-led crackdown on VPNs could serve as a cautionary tale, illustrating the collateral damage these restrictions inflict on businesses and individual privacy.
“I think the only reason these proposals have gotten this far is because we haven’t seen that impact. The reality is that it’s very difficult to implement a ban on VPNs across the board; to do it completely specifically is almost impossible,” she said.
We test and review VPN services in the context of legal recreational uses. For example: 1. Access a service from another country (subject to the terms and conditions of that service). 2. Protect your online security and strengthen your online privacy abroad. We do not support or approve the use of a VPN service to break the law or conduct illegal activities. Consumption of paid pirated content is not endorsed or endorsed by Future Publishing.
Follow TechRadar on Google News And add us as your favorite source to get our news, reviews and expert opinions in your feeds. Make sure to click the Follow button!
