Earlier quoted context omitted.
It does. Journalists are rarely experts on the field they are reporting on (see also: Gell Mann amnesia) so even though the article's author is speaking authoritatively, he has no experience in law, but an MFA. (See the "About Sam" section at: https://tech.yahoo.com/author/sam-chapman-engadget/ ). A more truthful take would be something like "Utah is the latest state to pass yet another law that conflicts with the co…
> A more truthful take would be something like "Utah is the latest state to pass yet another law that conflicts with the constitution and will not go into effect". The law will go into effect probably. It may be negated later.
You could say that they are in effect when the law becomes official, but for all practical purposes, the prohibition on describing what a VPN is or how to use it is unenforceable and not in effect.