Nevada Senate bill addresses AI-generated child pornography

Nevada Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro speaks during a press conference at the Grant Sawyer State Office Building Wednesday, Aug. 2, 2023. In background from left, Speaker of the Nevada Assembly Steve Yeager and Nevada Senator Rochelle Nguyen. Photo by Wade Vandervort

CARSON CITY — Nevada legislators are racing to close legal loopholes that have emerged with the rise of artificial intelligence technology being used to create and distribute child sexual abuse material.

State Senate Majority Leader Nicole Cannizzaro, D-Las Vegas, introduced Senate Bill 263, which would create a definition of “computer-generated child pornography.” That definition includes modified images of legal adults made to appear as children in sexual contexts.

“Existing statutes weren’t written to cover AI-generated images,” said Nevada Attorney General Aaron Ford, who testified alongside Cannizzaro at a recent hearing. “The law depends on clear definitions, and right now, terms like ‘person’ and ‘minor’ may not account for this new technology, and these are gaps that give predators an out.”

The urgency of the legislation is underscored by recent findings from the England-based Internet Watch Foundation, which surveyed a dark web forum and discovered over 3,500 AI-generated child sexual abuse images.

This has created significant challenges for law enforcement and Ford’s investigators, who must treat every AI-generated image as if it depicts a real child, consuming valuable time and resources that could be directed toward helping actual victims.

“If left unaddressed, I think we’re going to find ourselves in a much more precarious situation in the next legislative session,” Cannizzaro told the state Senate Judiciary Committee.

Constitutional considerations

The proposed legislation has raised questions about First Amendment protections, with lawmakers referencing the 2002 U.S. Supreme Court ruling in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition.

That decision struck down a federal law provision banning “virtual child pornography,” since the justices said no actual child was involved and it wasn’t consistent with previous court decisions.

Cannizzaro said the proposal differs from the 2002 case because the federal statute didn’t differentiate between a child and a fictional creation, instead pointing to a 2008 U.S. Supreme Court case that prohibited promoting material “that is intended to cause another to believe” it was child pornography.

“Protecting and guarding against the exploitation of children for sexual material purposes absolutely is a compelling state interest,” Cannizzaro argued. “That is something that this state has, I would argue, an obligation and a duty to do.”

The bill appears to have bipartisan backing, with Republican state Sen. Ira Hansen of Sparks calling it a measure that could appeal to Republican Gov. Joe Lombardo, given his law enforcement background. Lombardo is the former Clark County sheriff.

However, even those appearing to support the bill have raised questions about implementation. Cannizzaro acknowledged that the law would not provide clear-cut answers in every situation, citing the example of adult content creators who may be of legal age but appear younger to appeal to certain audiences.

“There’s not going to be a bright-line test that’s going to exist in this bill,” she conceded.

The public defender’s offices in Clark and Washoe counties, as well as the ACLU of Nevada, have spoken against the bill.

Angela Knott, deputy public defender with the Washoe County Public Defender’s office, expressed concern that the proposal doesn’t provide exceptions for juveniles who “may share naked selfies or use AI to alter their body parts.”

“No one in this room supports child pornography. We are all against it but given the importance of this topic and its sensitive nature, we should have an increased duty to make sure that we get this bill right,” Knott said.

Cannizzaro said the definitions put into this bill will cover the type of computer-generated materials law enforcement is encountering even as AI technology continues evolving.

“However, we absolutely have to be vigilant about the changing nature of this technology,” Cannizzaro wrote in a statement to the Sun. “So while I’m not as concerned about needing to again update the law in the next few years, I think it’s going to be important that the Legislature work with law enforcement to revisit this area of law in future sessions to ensure it’s sufficient.”