Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Online Child Exploitation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee Advances Bill Expanding Tools to Investigate Online Child Exploitation; DOJ and Task Force Cite Rising Cybertips
Summary
House Bill 82 would expand statutes governing online exploitation of children, allow undercover officers to stand in for child victims in certain online stings, and add related prosecutorial tools. Department of Justice witnesses and the state's Internet Crimes Against Children commander reported a sharp rise in cyber tips and urged passage.
The Senate Judiciary Committee heard testimony on House Bill 82, which would amend multiple statutes to help law enforcement investigate and prosecute online sexual exploitation of children, including activity involving artificial intelligence and sextortion.
Sponsor Representative Cathy Love said the bill aims "to help us keep up with the times" by updating statutes for an era of social media and AI-driven exploitation. The Department of Justice requested the changes and witnesses characterized the measure as a collection of targeted, technology‑focused tools for investigators and prosecutors.
Alex Sturhan, director of external affairs for the Montana Department of Justice, said the bill was requested by the DOJ and described it as "another tool in the toolbox" to close gaps created by evolving technology. Assistant Attorney General Celine Koepke described specific changes, saying the bill adds language "to provide that a law enforcement officer acting undercover can stand in the place of a real child victim to catch these predators" and that the language appears across multiple child‑exploitation statutes.
Brian Cassidy, commander of Montana’s Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) task force, told the committee the volume of reports is rising sharply: "In Montana, we received over 3,000 cyber tips last year." Cassidy and other witnesses described growing use of AI to create sexualized images of minors from publicly available photos and stressed that sextortion and grooming have become more prevalent and more technically complex.
Other proponents included the Montana Family Foundation, which urged stronger protections for children in online environments, and the Montana Police Protective Association. Lisa Bennett, a Carbon County resident and proponent, asked the committee to harmonize terminology in the bill; prosecutors recommended changing a phrase on page 8 from "sexual act" to the already defined statutory term "sexual conduct." Department of Corrections and prosecution witnesses described how cases involving minors can be handled differently depending on age and statutory criteria.
Committee members asked about likely case volume and penalties. The Department of Justice witness said the bureau’s direct prosecution caseload for these offenses is likely to remain modest but that the bill would assist smaller counties that need DOJ expertise. The sponsor noted the Department of Corrections estimates the bill could add roughly three incarcerations per year to state custody.
Witnesses and several senators discussed fine levels for grooming (the bill sets a term of up to 10 years and a $10,000 fine) and whether that fine typically is imposed at sentencing. Prosecutors said fines are often symbolic because courts must find an ability to pay.
The committee took no final roll-call vote during the hearing. Members discussed a proposed amendment to replace an inconsistent phrase with the statutory term "sexual conduct"; Representative Love indicated she would accept that change if DOJ supported it.
