Michigan House Bill 4938, the “Anticorruption of Public Morals Act,” was introduced on September 11, 2025 in the 103rd Michigan Legislature. As written, it would criminalize broad categories of online sexual content and require internet service providers to deploy content filters and to detect and block “circumvention tools,” explicitly including virtual private networks (VPNs), proxy servers, and encrypted tunneling methods. It would also ban the sale or promotion of such tools when used to access prohibited material.

This market asks whether some version of HB 4938 will be enacted into Michigan law by the end of the current 2025–2026 legislative term, with its core VPN / circumvention-tool ban still substantively in place.

Resolution criteria

Resolve YES if, on or before 11:59 pm Eastern time on December 31, 2026, all of the following are true:

1. A bill that is clearly derived from 2025 House Bill 4938 is enacted in Michigan (passed by both chambers and signed by the governor, or enacted over a veto) during the 2025–2026 legislative term.

2. The enacted law defines “circumvention tools” (or an equivalent concept) in a way that explicitly includes VPNs or “virtual private networks,” and:
   

   • either requires ISPs or other network operators to monitor for and block traffic using such tools,

   • or prohibits selling, promoting, or providing such tools for accessing the banned content.

3. No later amendment or accompanying carve-out in the same law neutralizes that restriction for general public use. For example, if the final law:
   

   • removes VPNs and similar tools from the “circumvention tools” definition, or

   • explicitly protects normal consumer and corporate VPN usage in a way that means ISPs are not required or allowed to generally block VPNs,
     then the VPN ban is considered not intact and the market resolves NO.

4. If a narrower exemption is added (for example, a narrow carve-out only for some government or corporate networks) but the general ban on VPNs / circumvention tools for ordinary users remains, the VPN ban is considered intact and this condition is satisfied.

Resolve NO if any of the following happen by the resolution date:

• HB 4938, or any successor vehicle carrying its main content, fails to pass both chambers or is vetoed and not overridden.

• A related bill passes but omits VPNs / circumvention tools entirely, or reduces their treatment to something clearly weaker than the current “monitor and block” plus “ban sale or promotion” approach.

• The bill dies at the end of the 2025–2026 term without enactment and is merely reintroduced in a later legislature under a new bill number.

If the situation is ambiguous (for example, conflicting interpretations of whether a carve-out truly guts the VPN ban), the market should resolve based on the plain text of the enacted statute and the most authoritative contemporary reporting (Michigan Legislature site, major Michigan or national outlets, or serious legal/tech analysis).

Timeframe / Close date

The 103rd Michigan Legislature runs through December 31, 2026, and bills from 2025 can carry over into the 2026 session.

I’d set the market close date to December 31, 2026, with resolution once it’s clear whether HB 4938 or a direct successor has been enacted and what the final text says.

Primary resolution sources

In order of priority:

• Official Michigan Legislature pages for HB 4938 and any successor bills in the 2025–2026 term (bill history and final enrolled text).

• The published text of the enacted law, if any, and any official session laws / public acts database.

• Coverage from reputable outlets specifically discussing the VPN / circumvention-tool provisions in the final law (for example TechRadar, Proton’s public policy commentary, Reason, etc.).

If there’s a conflict between news summaries and the statutory text, the statutory text controls.