- Wisconsin Lawmakers Remove VPN Ban Provision From Age Verification Bill
- Removed requirement for adult sites to block VPN users
- Digital rights experts warn that problems with privacy and freedom of expression persist
Wisconsin lawmakers removed a controversial VPN ban from 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 that distributed “harmful” material to minors to block all users connecting through a VPN.
Republican Senator Van Wanggaard proposed removing the provision on Wednesday, February 19. The amendment also added “virtual service provider” to the final paragraphs of the bill to clarify that the VPN companies themselves are not liable under the law. The Senate welcomed the change and the Assembly agreed the next day and sent the bill to the Governor’s desk for his 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.”
“It’s great news. Politicians listened to the concerns and fears of VPN users in Wisconsin, how a ban simply wouldn’t work, and they removed that section,” Rindala “Rin” Alajaji, EFF Associate Director of State Affairs, told TechRadar.
Alajaji warns that the broader bill remains problematic, citing potential privacy violations, security risks and restrictions on free speech.
Privacy and freedom of expression remain at risk
“It seems like the public advocacy and opposition really worked. But I want to be clear that the bill is still very problematic even without the VPN provision,” Alajaji told TechRadar.
Like similar age verification laws appearing in the US, Wisconsin’s bill would require both 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 abuses.
The EFF also maintains that the bill’s definition of what is “harmful” is dangerously broad. As written, any sexually explicit content must have an age restriction if it lacks “serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors.” It’s a vague standard that critics say invites excessive censorship, chills legal discourse and leaves companies vulnerable to unpredictable law enforcement.
Beyond Wisconsin
Wisconsin isn’t the only state weighing VPN restrictions alongside age verification laws. Michigan introduced a similar bill last September, although the proposal has yet to gain significant support.
Alajaji told TechRadar that Michigan’s bill was just introduced and a hearing has not yet been scheduled. He calls the delay a “good thing,” as 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 material “harmful to minors,” which controversially includes any reference to transgender people.
While American VPN users may be safe for now, the situation on the other side of the Atlantic is more precarious. UK politicians have shown increasing commitment to “closing the VPN loophole” that bypasses mandatory age checks. Prime Minister Keir Starmer recently confirmed that the government may “age restrict or limit VPN use by children” following a three-month consultation period.
Despite the concerns of British users, the prospect of restrictions in the UK may inadvertently strengthen the global argument against such bans. Alajaji suggests that a UK-led crackdown on VPNs could serve as a warning, illustrating the collateral damage such 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 VPN ban across the board; doing it with complete precision is almost impossible,” he 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 when you are abroad. We do not support or condone using a VPN service to break the law or conduct illegal activities. Future Publishing does not endorse or approve the consumption of paid pirated content.
Follow TechRadar on Google News and add us as a preferred source to receive news, reviews and opinions from our experts in your feeds. Be sure to click the Follow button!
