Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Child Protection Laws Study topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Lawmakers seek study of state laws on criminal conduct against children, including AI and terminology updates
Summary
Representative Mary Schneider asked the committee to authorize a legislative study of statutes covering crimes against children. Proponents said the study should update outdated language (for example, replacing references to '****** performance') and evaluate how artificial intelligence affects child‑protection statutes and prosecution.
The House Judiciary Committee heard House Bill 1410, a request for a legislative management study "regarding a review of state laws relating to criminal conduct against children," introduced by Representative Mary Schneider.
Representative Schneider said the study would review statutory language and recommended replacing outdated phrases such as "****** performance" with terminology like "child sexual abuse material" (CSAM) or other language deemed appropriate by the study. Schneider said the study would also examine the role of artificial intelligence in creating or facilitating crimes involving children and review investigation and prosecution practices for child sexual abuse, physical abuse and neglect.
Witnesses included Anna Frizzell of the Children's Advocacy Centers, who told the committee that the term "performance" wrongly implies willing participation by minors and urged the legislature to update terminology and align sanctions and definitions across statutes. Christy Dodd, executive director of Families Flourish ND (formerly Prevent Child Abuse North Dakota), supported the study and underscored resources the task force has produced on prevention and professional training.
TechND indicated support for a study that would gather multidisciplinary input; witnesses and the sponsor said the legislative study would rely on experts—law enforcement, prosecutors, child‑welfare professionals, victim advocates, technology experts and others—to develop recommendations for any statutory changes.
Committee members asked procedural questions about the study's composition and how outside experts would participate; legislators noted that the interim study body would be composed of legislators who could solicit expert testimony during the interim. The committee closed the hearing and received written materials from the task force and partner organizations.
Why it matters: Advocates argued that language updates and a focused review could improve prosecutions, victim protection and statutory clarity as technology such as AI changes how child‑exploitation material is created and distributed.
What’s next: The committee will consider the study request and any amendment language before deciding whether to add the study to the legislative management docket.
