How Are Phone Apps Supposed To Check Users' Ages?

(Source: MIRS.news, Published 02/11/2026) A trade association cautioned about the impact on app developers as states consider laws requiring app stores to verify users’ ages before downloading certain apps. 

Michigan doesn’t have a specific App Store Accountability Act (ASAA), but U.S. Rep. John James (R-Shelby Township) introduced a bill – H.R. 3149 – in May that is designed to ensure children do not have access to age-restricted material online. 

“There are fewer apps on people’s devices than there were 10 years ago,” Parag Shah, co-founder and chief technology officer of Minneapolis-based hospitality technology company Vēmos, said Wednesday during a webinar hosted by The App Association, which represents the small business tech community in Washington, D.C. 

“I think a big part of that is people have app fatigue, and if we add more compliance to that process, I think that is going to continue to be the case,” he added. 

Shah believes the “real issue” is that lawmakers eager to address online privacy and security for children “don’t understand the long-term ramifications” of how the written laws impact the economy, new business or innovation in the country. 

Shah believes that lawmakers’ solutions are not necessarily solving the problem of addressing children’s security and privacy online. 

The webinar discussed the impact of new state ASAA-type laws on app developers, focusing on age-verification mandates in Texas, Utah, Louisiana and California. The legislation requires age verification for the app store and parental consent for users under age 18. It would also link a minor’s device to a parent or guardian. 

Before Christmas, U.S. District Judge Robert Pitman in Texas’ Western District issued a preliminary injunction against that state’s law, which was set to go into effect Jan. 1. 

Pitman held the Texas law – which required app store companies to create means for minors to obtain parental consent to download apps or make purchases within an app – likely violated the First Amendment. 

“While this Court finds that SB 2420 is more likely than not unconstitutional, the Court recognizes the importance of ongoing efforts to better safeguard children when they are on their devices,” Pitman wrote. 

Shah said app developers care about children’s privacy, “but we have to understand there is a better solution to solving” the problem. He likened the challenge for app developers to a family with children sitting down in a restaurant and full menus – including alcoholic beverage choices –  being available to every family member, including the children.  

The server in that scenario would confirm the age of the person ordering the alcoholic drink, but digital menus online would have to be able to identify if someone of non-legal drinking age was seeing that alcoholic drink via an app. 

If there is a bug in the app, Shah explained, the app developer could be held legally liable under the ASAA-type laws for showing a minor the alcoholic drink menu. 

“Think about that for a moment,” Shah suggested. “How many failure points are out there for app developers in that kind of situation? … And then, who’s responsible for that? … These laws are actually having to change the user experience based on who is viewing and based on the age flag that’s being received.” 

Shah estimated that smaller developers would face significant costs and technical challenges to comply with the ASAA laws, estimating upwards of $20,000 in upfront costs. 

Shah and Tyler Bridegan, a partner with Houston, Texas-based law firm Womble Bond Dickinson, both emphasized a need for better coordination between app stores and developers. 

Bridegan, a former director of privacy and tech enforcement at the Texas Attorney General’s Office, discussed the broader implications of laws like those in Texas, including potential litigation risks. He said Pitman’s ruling focused on the threshold issue, determining Texas’ law is content-based and subject to strict scrutiny. 

Strict scrutiny is the legal review used to determine whether the government action was constitutional. 

Pitman concluded Texas’ law was content-based because it excludes apps for nonprofits, educational institutions and law enforcement, which were seen as targeting certain content. 

Meanwhile, in late December, James’ bill advanced unanimously out of the House Commerce, Manufacturing and Trade Subcommittee, which received letters of support from more than 4,500 parents, to the full committee. 

Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) introduced a similar bill – S.1586 – which was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation. 

Support for James’ bill has come from law enforcement, including Livingston County Sheriff Mike Murphy, who is running for Senate District 22 seat, and Marquette County Sheriff Gregory Zyburt, as well as the International Union of Police Association. 

“I believe that kids cannot consent, and parents have a right to know,” James said when he introduced his bill in May. “I believe that our kids should not be engaged with or buy adult or addictive material in the physical world or in the online world.”