HF1434 (Legislative Session 94 (2025-2026))
Age verification required for websites with material harmful to minors, enforcement by the attorney general provided, and private right of action created.
Related bill: SF2105
AI Generated Summary
Purpose
The bill would require age verification for websites that show material harmful to minors, to prevent minors from accessing such content. It would give the attorney general enforcement authority and also create a private right of action for parents or guardians against commercial entities that fail to verify age.
Key definitions (selected terms)
- commercial entity: for-profit businesses such as corporations, LLCs, partnerships, or sole proprietorships.
- host: the service that stores and maintains a website’s files so the site is accessible online.
- identifying information: data that is linked or linked to a person.
- interactive computer service: a system that provides or enables access to the Internet or to a library/educational service, used by multiple users.
- material harmful to minors: content that, when viewed by minors, appeals to prurient interests or is patently offensive and lacks serious value for minors.
- intimate part: genitals, pubic area, or anus (and for females, a partially or fully exposed nipple).
- sexual contact/sexual penetration: defined acts of touching intimate parts or sexual acts.
- shares or distributes: makes material available for viewing or download.
- 18 years of age or older: the age threshold for access.
- Minnesota resident or in Minnesota: the target audience for age verification.
Main Provisions
- Age verification requirement
- A commercial entity that shares or distributes material harmful to minors on a website that has 25% or more pages meeting the criterion, or hosts a website meeting that criterion, must verify that a person accessing the site in Minnesota is at least 18.
- Verification methods
- Verification must use a commercially available database regularly used to verify age and identity, or another commercially reasonable method approved by the commissioner of commerce.
- The commissioner can review and approve methods, and approval is not subject to standard rulemaking.
- Data privacy
- The entity performing verification must not retain identifying information submitted to verify age.
- If an entity knowingly retains identifying information, it must compensate the individual for damages (including reasonable attorney fees) resulting from the retention.
- Enforcement and penalties
- The attorney general can receive reports of violations, investigate, and bring civil enforcement actions. Each access in violation is a separate violation.
- Parents or guardians can sue the violating entity for damages, costs, disbursements, and attorney fees, plus any other equitable relief the court assigns.
- A violator may face a civil penalty of up to $25,000 per violation.
- Scope and exclusions
- The law does not impose obligations on Internet service providers (ISPs) or on users of an interactive computer service.
Significance / What changes this would bring
- Creates a new legal framework requiring age verification for certain online content.
- Establishes both state enforcement (via the attorney general) and private civil action pathways for affected individuals.
- Introduces a clear threshold (25% of pages with harmful material) to trigger the requirement.
- Establishes privacy protections for verification data and penalties for improper retention.
- Grants the Commissioner of Commerce authority to approve verification methods, with a streamlined approval process outside typical rulemaking.
Practical considerations
- Implementation challenges for websites, especially smaller entities.
- Potential privacy concerns around age verification data and how “identifying information” is defined and handled.
- Legal risk for entities if a minor accesses content despite verification (per separate-violation accounting).
- Exemptions for ISPs and general users of online services.
Relevant Terms age verification, material harmful to minors, Minnesotan residents, Minnesota, 25 percent threshold, commercial entity, host, identifying information, interactive computer service, intimate part, sexual contact, sexual penetration, shares or distributes, commercially available database, commissioner of commerce, enforcement, attorney general, civil penalties, private right of action, damages, attorney fees, data privacy, rulemaking exemption, 18 years of age or older, access verification.
Actions
| Date | Chamber | Where | Type | Name | Committee Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| February 24, 2025 | House | Action | Introduction and first reading, referred to | Commerce Finance and Policy | |
| March 17, 2025 | House | Action | Author added | ||
| March 20, 2025 | House | Action | Author added | ||
| February 17, 2026 | House | Action | Author added | ||
| February 19, 2026 | House | Action | Authors added | ||
| February 23, 2026 | House | Action | Authors added |
Progress through the legislative process
Sponsors
- Rep. Ben Bakeberg (R)
- Rep. Ben Davis (R)
- Rep. Tom Dippel (R)
- Rep. Bidal Duran (R)
- Rep. Joshua Heintzeman (R)
- Rep. Kari Rehrauer (DFL)
- Rep. Isaac Schultz (R)
- Rep. Peggy Scott (R)
- Rep. Walter Hudson (R)
- Rep. Jim Joy (R)
- Rep. Krista Knudsen (R)
- Rep. Jon Koznick (R)
- Rep. Harry Niska (R)
- Rep. Thomas Sexton (R)
- Rep. Cal Warwas (R)
- Rep. Natalie Zeleznikar (R)
- Rep. Jeff Dotseth (R)