Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Criminal Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate Judiciary committee hears LB 965 to criminalize sexual contact by people in positions of trust
Summary
LB 965, introduced by Sen. Elliot Bostar, would prohibit sexual contact and exploitation by probation officers, guardians, conservators, foster/adoptive parents, and child-welfare service providers; proponents described power imbalances and gaps in current law, opponents urged narrowing language and flagged drafting issues including the definition of 'minor.'
Senator Elliot Bostar told the Judiciary Committee that LB 965 is intended to close gaps in Nebraska law that leave people under supervision, in guardianships or in child-welfare care vulnerable to sexual abuse and exploitation by those entrusted with their care.
"Our intent was narrow and straightforward, to prohibit probation officers from engaging in sexual activity with probationers," Bostar said, but testimony and stakeholder conversations led the office to expand the bill to cover problem-solving court employees, guardians, guardians ad litem, conservators, adoptive and foster parents, and child-welfare service providers. The bill aligns penalties with existing protections for corrections and parole staff and excludes consent as a defense where extreme power imbalances exist.
Proponents told the committee the changes are necessary. A representative of the Lancaster County and Nebraska County Attorneys Association characterized LB 965 as a "necessary gap-filler," saying the bill addresses multiple relationships where power imbalances create fertile ground for abuse. The Nebraska Alliance of Child Advocacy Centers and law-enforcement representatives supported the definitions and new criminal prohibitions for child-serving professionals. Probation leadership and the Administrative Office of the Courts argued the measure will strengthen public confidence and protect vulnerable wards.
Opponents, including the Nebraska Criminal Defense Attorneys Association, urged narrowing the scope and offered a draft amendment. They said the bill lacks a clear nexus requirement between the employee and the supervisee and warned that as written it could criminalize consensual contact in low-supervision probation circumstances and sweep in encounters with no practical power dynamic. The opponent also flagged a drafting issue in the bill’s definition of "minor," noting the text appears to use an upper bound of age 19 and could have unintended penalty consequences for certain age ranges.
In closing, Bostar said the office declined the narrowing amendment to remain consistent with existing parole and corrections statutes and promised to review the drafting questions raised about the definition of "minor." The committee recorded testimony from multiple stakeholders but did not take a committee vote during the hearing.
The bill also includes a narrowly tailored immunity provision for probation employees who obtain and administer opioid-overdose-reversal medication in good faith, and expands victim-witness assistance provisions to cover victims of the newly defined offenses.
