The Invest in Child Safety Act: what you need to know

Originally published at:

With the Senate back in session this week, today saw the introduction of a new law dedicated towards addressing child sexual exploitation: the Invest in Child Safety Act. Sponsored by Senator Ron Wyden and four Democratic colleagues, the law is offered as an alternative to the EARN IT Act, which experts had criticized for placing…


How do we make it clear we do not want enforcement against fictional depictions?


Great question, and the answer is that Prostasia Foundation will be proposing some amendments that would take care of that. Once they are ready I’ll post the link to an action form that you can take to support these amendments.


Excellent. Obscene fictional representations have no victim so I would hope this horrible aspect of the statue dies. If it doesn’t get enforced, it will essentially be forgotten, like most other stupid laws like “You can stack horse manure over 6 ft high:”. In Oakland, cross dressing was illegal until fairly recently, yet there has been pretty much no prosecution for decades. This is because laws die by either being repealed or ignored long enough by the government.

Reading through some users here, it seems a couple individuals are terrified of being indited for accessing fictional depictions. I don’t know whether they have or not, but their posts seem to imply they might have at some point. The Status of limitations for 1466 violations is very long because it’s a federal felony, I think 60 months from date of offense.

I can sort of understand the existence of some obscenity law, for example, I’m ok with preventing a recordings of a man being prison raped from being distributed, since it can be argued circulation can revictimizing the rape victim. But a fictional work like a manga drawing of a prison rape scene for example should be protected. Our laws need to be based on whether there is a victim or not.

Consensual adult porn, and fictional works of drawings and 3D works should be protected as there are no victims.

A possible amendment?

Prosecutorial and law enforcement funding must be used exclusively for prosecuting USC 2252 violations. You know, unlawful sexual videos and photographs of children. Nothing should go to prosecuting consensual adult porn nor drawings.

Thanks Katya, but we settled on something even simpler. Since there is already a legal definition of “child exploitation offenses,” which would exclude obscenity crimes and sex trafficking of adults, we just incorporated that into our suggested amendments.

Here is our letter to the bill’s sponsors.

And here is where you can tell them that you support the bill with our amendments.



I also added that I want to prioritize prosecution resources to: 18 U.S.C. § 1201, 18 U.S.C. ch.109A, 18 U.S.C. ch. 110, 18 U.S.C. ch. 117 to make it clear I don’t want resources wasted on the prosecution of action figures, CGI that isn’t virtually indistinquishable, cartoons, or on adult pornography. The USC I listed above cover all child sexual exploitation crimes, ranging from CSAM offenses to rape.

Going to be more specific with each statue actually:

18 U.S.C. § 2241 (aggravated sexual abuse)
18 U.S.C. § 2242 (sexual abuse)
18 U.S.C. § 2243 (sexual abuse of a ward or child)
18 U.S.C. § 2244 (abusive sexual contact)
18 U.S.C. § 2245 (sexual abuse resulting in death)

18 U.S.C. § 2251 (sexual exploitation of children)
18 U.S.C. § 2251A (selling or buying children)
18 U.S.C. § 2252 (transporting, distributing or selling child sexually exploitive material)
18 U.S.C. § 2252A (transporting or distributing child pornography)
18 U.S.C. § 2252B (misleading names on the Internet)
18 U.S.C. § 2260 (making child sexually exploitative material overseas for export to the U.S.)

18 U.S.C. § 2421 (transportation of illicit sexual purposes)
18 U.S.C. § 2422 (coercing or enticing travel for illicit sexual purposes)
18 U.S.C. § 2423 (travel involving illicit sexual activity with a child)
18 U.S.C. § 2424 when linked to sex trafficking
18 U.S.C. § 2425 (interstate transmission of information about a child relating to illicit sexual activity)


I think that’s a good start. Do you think it would be a good idea to outline very specific criminal statues you want prioritize like what ethical ai seems to be suggesting? As well as making clear we don’t want any wasted on prosecution of adult obscenity or fictional obscenity?

As a matter of tactics, no. The simpler and more “common sense” our amendments appear, the better chance that they will even get looked at. I’m trying to schedule a face-to-face meeting with one of the co-sponsors too.

1 Like