The House passed the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (HR-1865) Tuesday evening on a 388-25 vote. The House approved a trio of amendments supported by lead sponsor Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Mo., amid continued opposition by some tech, privacy and open internet proponents to the possible changes. The amendments included one from Rep. Mimi Walters, R-Calif., to include language from the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (S-1693), which the House cleared on a 308-107 vote. Both bills would amend Communications Decency Act Section 230 to make it easier to bring criminal charges against websites that knowingly facilitate or promote sex trafficking. Opponents of adding the S-1693 language say HR-1865's existing language is a more targeted approach (see 1801040050).
Section 230
The House Rules Committee was to have considered Monday evening the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (HR-1865), setting up a planned Tuesday floor debate and vote. The committee will in part consider an amendment from Rep. Mimi Walters, R-Calif., to include language from the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (S-1693). Both bills would amend Communications Decency Act Section 230 to make it easier to bring criminal charges against websites that knowingly facilitate or promote sex trafficking. Some tech, privacy and open internet proponents have strongly favored HR-1865's existing language as a more targeted approach to curbing online sex trafficking (see 1801040050). Sens. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., S-1693's lead sponsors, lauded Walters for seeking to add language from their bill to HR-1865. The additional provisions deserve "every member’s support," they said.
YouTube and Prager University are at odds over a preliminary injunction sought by the conservative group. Prager said in support of its motion for a preliminary injunction that the admission by YouTube and its Google parent that Prager videos don't contain age-restricted content, while contending the videos contain potentially mature content sufficient to warrant viewer access restrictions, are enough to justify the requested relief. Prager said in the docket 17-cv-6064 filing (in Pacer) Friday in U.S. District Court in San Jose that YouTube's acknowledgement its Restricted Mode can improperly restrict videos in a way to create viewpoint discrimination backs the group's push. Google/YouTube in a reply (in Pacer) Friday isaid Prager's case is "a public relations campaign disguised as a lawsuit" when it asks the court to ignore YouTube's First Amendment and Communications Decency Act Section 230 rights to help users avoid content on its service. Prager sued YouTube last fall over the restricted mode feature (see 1801030009).
The House likely votes Monday on anti-sex trafficking legislation, with the lower chamber proposing an amendment to include victim-focused language from the bill's Senate version, lawmakers said Wednesday. Rep. Ann Wagner’s, R-Mo., Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (HR-1865) will be amended to include language from Sen. Rob Portman’s, R-Ohio, Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (S-1693) (see 1801300047). Rep. Mimi Walters, R-Calif., introduced the amendment, which includes victim-focused provisions from the Senate bill. The legislation alters Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, making it easier to bring criminal charges against websites that knowingly facilitate or promote sex trafficking. Walters said her amendment would allow victims to pursue federal civil claims against websites that deliberately facilitate or support sex trafficking. The legislation “is the most effective way to empower victims, equip state and local prosecutors, and ensure websites can no longer traffic children with impunity,” Wagner said. Consumer Watchdog praised the measure, saying it will allow prosecutors to hold websites like Backpage accountable for enabling child sex trafficking.
Parts of the tech industry came under nearly as much fire as sex traffickers Tuesday with an at-times heated panel discussion on the House's Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA)(HR-1865) vs. the Senate's Stop Enabling Sex Trafficking Act (SESTA)(S-1693). "I don't understand why you have these entrenched interests slinging arrows," said former federal prosecutor Francey Hakes.
Liability protections for third-party online content should be included in the North American Free Trade Agreement, said 55 scholars and groups of various regulatory persuasions in a letter Monday to trade heads of the U.S., Canada and Mexico. The internet was an "obscure electronic network" when NAFTA was negotiated and now is an essential part of the economy, said the Center for Democracy & Technology, Competitive Enterprise Institute, FreedomWorks, New America’s Open Technology Institute, Public Knowledge, R Street, TechFreedom and others. They urged that a new agreement include immunity provisions like Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, which protects online companies from legal action for content on their sites. Immunity provisions make it easy for startups to launch new services, and advance consumers' free speech rights, the letter said. “The legal exposure of Internet businesses raises vitally important trade issues,” blogged Santa Clara Law professor Eric Goldman, who spearheaded the effort and has been critical of congressional legislation aimed at curbing online sex trafficking that would make exceptions to Section 230 protections (see 1801040050). "New rules on cross-border data flows, non-disclosure requirements for source code and algorithms, and highlighting the role of interoperability mechanisms to transfer data across borders" should be part of a new pact, said Software & Information Industry Association Vice President-Public Policy Mark MacCarthy.
Momentum is building for floor consideration of legislation to curb online sex trafficking, but conflicting House and Senate approaches could stymie compromise if a bill passes one or both chambers, said lobbyists, victims’ advocates and committee aides. S-1693 passed by the Senate Commerce Committee (see 1711080042) appears to have a head start, with 60 co-sponsors, dozens of advocacy groups and the National Association of Attorneys General supporting the bill. The groups announced plans for a briefing and rally next Thursday to draw attention to the bill, the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act.
A bipartisan Senate bill to combat online sex trafficking has 60 co-sponsors, said S-1693 sponsors Sens. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, and Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., Wednesday. The Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (SESTA) would clarify Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act to ensure that websites that knowingly facilitate sex trafficking can be held liable so victims can file civil suits. The Senate Commerce Committee unanimously approved the bill Nov. 8 (see 1711080042). Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., an original author of Section 230, immediately placed a hold on SESTA. He told us he remains opposed to the bill.
House Judiciary Committee approval Tuesday of HR-1865 as expected (see 1712110052) to punish online sex traffickers sets up a clash with a similar S-1693 that victims’ rights groups said is better. The committee approved the bill on voice vote with little debate, although ranking member Jerry Nadler, D-N.Y., said he would oppose the amended measure if it moves to the floor as is. The Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (FOSTA), sponsored by Rep. Ann Wagner, R-Mo., was amended without being “fully vetted,” Nadler said. The bill has 172 co-sponsors.
HR-1865 to create tougher penalties on online sex traffickers enjoys tech industry support and appears headed for approval Tuesday in a House Judiciary Committee markup (see 1712080026), lobbyists, aides and lawyers told us. A manager’s amendment adds a provision making it illegal to promote prostitution through “means of interstate or foreign commerce,” with violators subject to fines and imprisonment up to 10 years. “We support the bill, and find this a much better approach” than the Senate’s Stop Enabling Online Sex Traffickers Act (SESTA) (S-1693), said Rachel Wolbers, policy director of the tech startup group Engine. Victims' rights groups will oppose the bill.