Are We Criminalizing Thought? Minnesota’s AI Bill Challenges SCOTUS Precedent
Minnesota lawmakers are advancing legislation that would criminalize the creation and distribution of AI-generated images depicting child sexual abuse—even when no real child is involved. The bill proposes penalties of up to five years in prison and $10,000 in fines for disseminating such content. 
This legislation raises significant concerns about the boundaries of criminal law and the potential infringement on free expression. The U.S. Supreme Court, in Ashcroft v. Free Speech Coalition (2002), struck down a federal ban on virtual child pornography, emphasizing that depictions not involving real children are protected under the First Amendment. 
The proposed Minnesota bill appears to challenge this precedent by seeking to criminalize content that, while offensive to many, does not involve actual victims. This shift from punishing actions that cause direct harm to penalizing the creation of certain thoughts or expressions is a slippery slope.
Moreover, the legislation could have unintended consequences. By focusing on the criminalization of AI-generated content, resources might be diverted from addressing actual cases of child exploitation. There’s also the risk of overreach, where individuals could face severe penalties for content that, while distasteful, does not result in tangible harm.
As technology evolves, it’s crucial to ensure that our laws protect individuals without infringing upon fundamental rights. Criminalizing content that lacks a real-world victim sets a concerning precedent.
What comes next? Arresting players of the video game “Call of Duty” for murder?
Discover more from Florida Action Committee
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Again criminalizing pornography instead of treating it as sexual addiction
The law will pass. Any good attorney can use child sex dolls as comparison and rebuttal for any argument against the bill as president.
They are already illegal in all states and there is no difference in using a child sex doll that is not a real victim than looking at pictures of nonexistent children.
I believe both are unconstitutional, but when has that ever-stopped lawmakers from passing laws?
It is called political cred to which they need more than enough of when it comes to elections. They will pass it unless told otherwise by the AG and the governor won’t sign it into law because they know it can and probably be challenged in the courts. Then it again, they all could let is slide to see how far it gets before it gets challenged and struck down as unconstitutional where the politicians can point fingers at others who did that while keeping the cred they want and need for elections saying they tried.
Criminalizing thought indeed. But in the same vein, there are no real-world victims in law enforcement’s internet stings where an officer poses as a “victim” online and entraps an unwitting individual. The true victims in those cases are those that law enforcement preys upon. I wish we could get those operations criminalized and anyone convicted due to them freed from the registry and clear their names.
@Beth
Although not funny, it is odd. Some who just were caught in a sting and did not actually offend but were set up by law enforcement traps, can get 20 years to life. On the other hand, I actually was dating someone underage (Not forced but illegal all the same) and with gain time I only did 4 years in prison. (Probation followed)
There are several counties in Florida that do these stings. Not saying keeping kids don’t need to be safe, but spending millions of tax payers dollars for fake stings is being paid by citizens. Some justify that just because they thought they were meeting a real underaged person, they deserve to spend life in prison. And others who actually had sexually activities with an underaged person (Willfully or not) got probation, house arrest, prison, or all of the above, but almost never a life sentence.
I am sorry but as a “Former” offender myself, if you are looking at even cartoon porn of kids, you are not getting mentally better and do not deserve to be removed from the registry. I only come on the computer to pay bills, email friends and family, post on F.A.C, buy on amazon and look up things like store hours etc.
Trying to justify looking at that is disturbing. Every day we need to break the cycle and get the heck off this registry. And once removed, stay off those sites if you want to remain free. Do we all struggle sometimes? Hell yes, but did we not learn our lesson the first time?
I thank you taking total responsibility for the crime you committed that got you placed on the registry. I’m Ex-Victim of sexual abuse and at 55 I still deal with what happed to me at age 6 7 and 8. When you are traumatized as a child that event never erases from your enormous brains hardrive. When your hardrive is corrupted it’s hard to maintain the memory after that. In order to defrag the human brains hardrive, one has to seek immediate counseling and possibly for LIFE. This why when I hear stories about sex offenders I hold deep-seated hate for them. If you ever get a chance look up a podcast show called AtlantaSteetInterviews. The stories a will blow your mind. When you think your story is bad you listen to others and yours is more mundane. If i ever see anyone rape of molest a child, I know for a fact I’m going to jail for Murder 1.
In Florida, those convicted of sexual battery against children younger than 12 can face the death penalty1. The law is named after Jessica Lunsford, a Florida girl-child who was kidnapped, raped, and murdered by a previously convicted sex offender3. Penalties for child sexual abuse vary with the specific offenses for which the perpetrator has been convicted5.
Florida has strict laws for child sexual abuse, including mandatory minimum sentences. Under Jessica’s Law, offenders face a minimum of 25 years in prison and lifetime electronic monitoring if the victim is under 12. Sentences can vary depending on the circumstances and charges, but Florida takes these cases very seriously1
Under Florida law, the use of deadly force is justified if a person reasonably believes it is necessary to prevent imminent death, great bodily harm, or the commission of a forcible felony, such as rape2. Florida’s “Stand Your Ground” law also removes the duty to retreat if the person is in a place where they have a legal right to be.
TO ALL PEDOPHILES, RAPIST AND CHILD MOLESTERS PLEASE UNDERSTAND YOUR LIFE IS AT STAKE IF I CATCH YOU IN THE ACT.
Mr D,
Just know we are on the same page when it comes to punishing sexual offenses. We are not suggesting in any way that severe punishment is not warranted for severe offenses. The nuance is that Jessica Lunsford, Adam Walsh, Megan Kanka, Cherish Perrywinkle, Jacob Wetterling, and others with laws named after them are extremely rare. Not all offenders are the same, but when lawmakers come up with these registration laws, they are crafted to deal with their offenders, which would be in prison for life regardless.
Not every person who has offended is the same. Some looked at pictures (admittedly f-ed up ones) on the internet, some met someone who lied about their age, some were baited into a sting by law enforcement, and even plenty of wrongfully accused.
Those who are out and in the community need to be able to function. If the registry does not serve its intended purpose and is only additional punishment, well people already served their sentences.
This why if it was a lapse in judgement then the case should be seen as such. 1 year probation and registry and then removed after probation. I also feel that if you committed low level crimes, that it shouldn’t be held against you for life but like a Credit report that falls off after 7 years the same should exist for all LOW-LEVEL FELONS. But history teaches us that ALL the laws on the books in each state were designed for black free slaves who purchased their freedom, called Manumission Rights. But often many Southern slave masters wouldn’t honor it or just say that the slave did something wrong, and they’re placed back into slavery forevermore. America is a wicked place for many.
Thanks D.A
Happy Easter (if you celebrate it)
Cherokee
I agree Jack, I can’t defend the AI generated child porn either. However, atleast they are not victimizing living children. On the other hand, will that desire increase until they actually do victimize an actual child? Then back to the other hand, will it give the court power to criminalize playing “Grand Theft Auto” or other games where crimes are committed?
It is very disturbing that someone would go through the efforts to make AI child generated child porn. If it’s not criminalized in some form it could possibly become the norm like the adult entertainment industry. Where someone is capitalizing off of selling that type of content. I personally think something needs to be done. Imo, it would only encourage more AI generated child porn if it’s not criminalized. But this is definitely a very very controversial topic.
@ CherokeeJack:
Normally, I love and fully agree with your posts, but take exception to this one.
First, to say that some people should be registered and others not completely counters the argument that there shouldn’t be a registry in the first place. It follows that that would include saying that someone doesn’t deserve to be removed, for whatever reason.
Second, the idea that porn or CP consumption increases the likelihood of actual contact offenses has absolutely no basis in fact. In general, porn consumption has increased exponentially in the internet age, yet the the rate of commission of sex crime has not increased at all – it has remained a consistent percentage of the population.
There is no discernible difference with CP or CSAM. Those arrested for possession or distribution of that never have a history of actual abuse, and those with records for abuse never have scores of CP or CSAM. There may be an exception or two, but not enough to justify the across-the-board rule of thumb currently in place.
Third, even if the demonstrably false narrative described above were true and CP/CSAM consumers were more likely to commit contact offenses, I would think it would make more sense to allow them to sate their urges with such material in order to at least delay (if not prevent) physical offenses.
And finally, the criminalization of thought – to include where one finds entertainment – was specifically prohibited by Stanley v. Georgia, 394 US 557 (1969). The syllabus summed it all up perfectly – “The State may not prohibit mere possession of obscene matter on the ground that it may lead to antisocial conduct… or proscribe such possession on the ground that it is a necessary incident to a statutory scheme prohibiting distribution”.
A society that penalizes people merely for thinking about things considered objectionable is one that scares the hell out of me. Beyond that, one can never be certain what is considered objectionable from one day to the next. And closing that Pandora’s box would be impossible to close once opened.
Dustin
I think you are missing my point. What I was trying to say is, we are supposed to be getting treatment, help or prove to a judge we are not a threat and by admitting someone is viewing child porn, even if it is cartoons, anime, or drawings, is still feeding the beast.
I am NOT trying to say I am better than anyone else. I am trying to help ALL of us who are struggle so we can somewhat get our lives back. One prison sentence was enough for me. And no I am not a whimp and survived prison for the most part. A few inmates gave me crap but it was the guards who try to mess up our sentences, especially when the notice was posted on the boards for everyone to see that you were going home.
We all have free will but when we do stupid things (I have done a life times worth) stupid things almost never end well. Do I want someone quietly sitting in their home watching porn to go to prison? I have mixed feelings but to justify switching from watching real kids to anime kids is still an un-healthy addiction that according to the article, could lead to arrest.
I was just mad because I DO NOT want anyone to go through what I and many others have. I ruined not only my life, but my mother almost went into a mental hospital after I was sent to prison. It is not just us whose lives are ruined, it is our families as well.
In some form or another, all states hold that a person is perfectly sane absent proof to the contrary. They also hold that standing alone, the commission of a crime is not evidence of mental illness.
I never have and never will understand the reasoning of how a criminal defendant is perfectly sane at the time of trial/plea hearing, yet insane enough to mandate mental health “treatment.” With drug abusers, “treatment” is incentivised in that sentences usually end up on “successful treatment” even though the vast majority of those offenders are usually right back in the system for new drug charges within a year (sometimes even days).
Not so with those convicted for sex crimes. “Treatment” is mandatory, completion will always coincide with the end of the sentence, and failure/refusal to participate for any reason (including inability to pay for such “service”) sends the individual right back to prison. Actual recidivism rates indicate that far more sex crime is the result of poor judgment, not some incurable mental illness that is presumed by the courts and public. Poor judgment is NOT mental illness.
I’ve never heard of anyone assaulting or robbing anyone else to support a porn, CP, or CSAM addiction. I’ve never heard of anyone committing an actual contact sex offense because he wasn’t getting the thrill he once got from porn, CP, or CSAM. While these addicts aren’t doing themselves any favors by indulging in these particular vices, they aren’t affecting the lives and well-being of anyone but themselves and their families. I can’t believe it would be any different with AI or animated versions.
That’s not to say that many convicted sex criminals don’t have mental health issues that require treatment of some kind. It’s only saying that mental illness should not be presumed merely because one was convicted for a sex crime, non-contact offenses in particular. I don’t think the anti-registry movement is served very well by conceding such misguided notions.
Many actions are and should be criminal. But thoughts and ideas are not and never should be, no matter how disturbing or objectionable. If they were, Stephen King, Quentin Tarantino, VC Andrews should be among the first convicted for thought crime.
This sets a dangerous precedent. If this is considered a crime, then by that logic, everyone involved in creating video games where players kill, steal, or commit crimes should also be prosecuted for distributing criminal content—and anyone who plays them should be guilty of possessing criminal thoughts.
Well Juxtapose THIS to all the crazy video games that are produced that depict horrible things-Like one of them is called ‘Grand Theft Auto, or something like that; so therefore what the difference