Latest action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Bans AI chatbots designed to simulate minors engaging in sexual conversations or conduct.
The problem
AI chatbots that simulate children in sexual situations may normalize child sexual abuse and exploit minors. Technology advances enable creation of these harmful tools.
The proposal
Makes it illegal to provide chatbots designed to look or act like minors while engaging in sexual content or conversations. Sets criminal penalties for violations.
The impact
Tech companies must remove such chatbots. Users face criminal consequences. Child safety advocates gain legal tools. AI developers must add safety filters to products.
Removes tools that could normalize sexual abuse of minors. May reduce demand for actual child exploitation material. Creates legal consequences for predatory behavior online.
Gives prosecutors and investigators clear laws to enforce. Makes it easier to prosecute people creating or distributing these chatbots.
Pushes technology companies to build safeguards into AI systems. Creates incentive for responsible AI development practices.
May restrict some forms of expression or creative writing. Could be challenged as limiting protected speech under First Amendment.
The bill may not clearly define what counts as 'minor-simulating' or 'sexually explicit.' This confusion could lead to inconsistent enforcement or accidental prosecution.
Hard to monitor worldwide internet activity. Violators may operate from other countries. May be difficult to prove who created or provided chatbots.
Companies must invest in monitoring and filtering systems. Small tech startups may struggle with compliance expenses.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Other bills in this policy area
HR 4307
Enhancing Detection of Human Trafficking Act
HR 10638
Skills Against Violence Act of 2026
HR 10565
Sexual Abuse Services in Detention Act
HR 10543
PREP Act
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.