When Michigan lawmakers introduced House Bill 4938, they wrapped it in the language of protection. Protecting children. Protecting families. Protecting “public morals.” On the surface, who could argue with that? The bill claims to fight traffickers, predators, and the flood of online obscenity by demanding stricter moderation from platforms and mandatory filtering by internet service providers.

But buried in the fine print is something far darker: a wholesale assault on the principle of privacy itself.

What the Bill Says

House Bill 4938, the so-called “Anticorruption of Public Morals Act,” does several things in the name of digital decency:

• Mandates ISP filtering to block prohibited content and forces providers to monitor and block “circumvention tools” such as VPNs, proxies, and encrypted tunnels.
• Bans the promotion or sale of these tools, framing them as devices whose “primary purpose” is to evade lawful safeguards.
• Imposes stiff penalties—civil fines of up to $500,000 per violation for ISPs, and criminal sentences of up to 25 years for those who distribute or facilitate access to prohibited material.
• Compels platforms to run 24/7 moderation, respond to law-enforcement requests within two business days, and submit annual transparency reports to the state police.
• Creates a “trusted flagger” system, empowering the Attorney General’s office to order removals and fine platforms $250,000 per day if they delay.

In its own words, the bill is about “closing loopholes,” “restoring digital decency,” and “defending the integrity of our shared space.”

What the Bill Means

Strip away the rhetoric, and a different picture emerges.

Privacy Becomes Criminality

The bill doesn’t merely regulate obscene material—it redefines privacy itself as suspect. VPNs, once used by businesses, journalists, travelers, and everyday citizens for security, suddenly become contraband. Choosing to keep your browsing safe from prying eyes is no longer seen as prudence; it is recast as an act of defiance against the state.

Transparency as Loyalty

The propaganda line says, “Law-abiding citizens don’t need secret tunnels.” But what this really means is that law-abiding citizens must prove their loyalty by being visible at all times. Privacy is reframed as unpatriotic, even dangerous. In practice, Michigan’s law demands not just obedience, but exposure.

Enforcement Through Fear

The massive fines and prison terms are not primarily about stopping crime—they are about deterrence. By making examples of those who use or promote VPNs, the state ensures that ordinary people will self-censor. Fear replaces freedom as the guiding principle of digital life.

Platforms Become Deputies

By requiring platforms to pre-screen all content with AI, respond instantly to government requests, and report directly to state police, the law effectively turns private companies into an enforcement arm of the state. The line between government surveillance and private enterprise disappears.

The Broader Consequences

If Michigan’s model spreads, the cultural shift will be profound. Children will grow up learning that privacy is shameful. Employers may demand proof of unfiltered browsing. Neighbors may report each other for “suspicious encryption use.” The idea of private thought—once central to American liberty—will wither under constant scrutiny.

And here lies the greatest irony: A bill sold as protecting families actually dismantles the very freedoms families depend on. Parents who once taught their kids to value independence will now teach them that safety lies in constant visibility.

The Slippery Logic

The justification behind the law is simple and seductive: If you’re not hiding anything, why should you need privacy? But this is a false equation. Privacy is not secrecy. It is dignity. It is the freedom to read, think, and explore without fear that every keystroke will be judged.

By conflating privacy with criminality, Michigan lawmakers set a precedent that erodes not just digital freedom, but democratic freedom. Because when privacy is outlawed, dissent is impossible. And when dissent is impossible, democracy is already gone.

Conclusion

The Michigan bill dresses itself in patriotic language, but its true effect is profoundly un-American. It teaches that freedom lies in submission, that safety requires exposure, and that privacy is treason. If such laws take root, the United States will not need foreign enemies to threaten liberty—it will have done the job itself.