    [Senate Hearing 119-315]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                                                            S. Hrg. 119-315

                            PROTECTING OUR CHILDREN
                      ONLINE AGAINST THE EVOLVING OFFENDER

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
                              UNITED STATES SENATE

                        ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                DECEMBER 9, 2025

                                   __________

                              Serial No. J-119-52

                                   __________

             Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

                     [GRAPHIC NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                            www.judiciary.senate.gov
                                www.govinfo.gov

                                   ______

                     U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

    62-972                    WASHINGTON : 2026

                           COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

                      CHARLES E. GRASSLEY, Iowa, Chairman

    LINDSEY O. GRAHAM, South Carolina    RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois,
    JOHN CORNYN, Texas                       Ranking Member
    MICHAEL S. LEE, Utah                 SHELDON WHITEHOUSE, Rhode Island
    TED CRUZ, Texas                      AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota
    JOSH HAWLEY, Missouri                CHRISTOPHER A. COONS, Delaware
    THOM TILLIS, North Carolina          RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut
    JOHN KENNEDY, Louisiana              MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii
    MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee          CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey
    ERIC SCHMITT, Missouri               ALEX PADILLA, California
    KATIE BOYD BRITT, Alabama            PETER WELCH, Vermont
    ASHLEY MOODY, Florida                ADAM B. SCHIFF, California

                 Kolan Davis, Chief Counsel and Staff Director
             Joe Zogby, Democratic Chief Counsel and Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                               OPENING STATEMENTS

                                                                       Page

    Grassley, Hon. Charles E.........................................     1
    Durbin, Hon. Richard J...........................................     2

                                   WITNESSES

    Coffren, Lauren..................................................     8
        Prepared statement...........................................    31
    Smolar, Jessica Lieber...........................................     6
        Prepared statement...........................................    51
    Woods, Tamia.....................................................     5
        Prepared statement...........................................    53

                                    APPENDIX

    Items submitted for the record...................................    59

                            PROTECTING OUR CHILDREN
                      ONLINE AGAINST THE EVOLVING OFFENDER

                                  ----------

                           TUESDAY, DECEMBER 9, 2025

                                  United States Senate,
                                    Committee on the Judiciary,
                                                        Washington, DC.
        The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:18 a.m., in
    Room 216, Hart Senate Office Building, Hon. Charles E.
    Grassley, Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
        Present: Senators Grassley [presiding], Graham, Cornyn,
    Hawley, Tillis, Blackburn, Britt, Moody, Durbin, Whitehouse,
    Klobuchar, Blumenthal, Hirono, Booker and Padilla.

            OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES E. GRASSLEY,
                 A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF IOWA

        Chairman Grassley. Good morning, everybody.
        Today's hearing will examine what we call the emerging
    issues involving child online exploitation and the evolving
    offenders that seem to keep up to date on everything they can
    do to harm these young people. As technology changes and
    evolves, so do bad actors who use it to commit all types of
    crime. This is especially true in the child exploitation space.
    Gone are the days of ordering child exploitation material from
    overseas by mail. Now, child exploitation material is readily
    available online through various file-sharing platforms,
    through direct access to victims and domestic and international
    websites, and groups such as ``764''.
        Not only has technology changed, but today's online child
    offenders have changed as well. Today's online offender is more
    violent, more cruel, and more shocking than offenders just 20
    years ago. Offenders will manipulate, pressure, harass, and
    seek to control vulnerable children through extortion,
    blackmail, and shame. That conduct is commonly called
    sextortion. Offenders extort children for money or other things
    of value, or to manipulate them to commit harmful acts, to live
    stream, or record for others to watch.
        Today's offenders target younger children, many between the
    ages of 12 and 15, but some as young as 5 and 6, and maybe in
    some cases even younger. Offenders exploit multiple victims,
    causing more pain, causing humiliation and degradation to more
    people than ever before. They leave families of victims in
    insufferable pain and despair and cause a lifetime of recovery
    for many victims. Offenders feel emboldened to carry out their
    illegal conduct on our children because of access to private,
    hidden, online groups of like-minded people who share their
    sick desire to harm and exploit children.
        Sadly, offenders often operate under the cover of secrecy,
    making it even more difficult for law enforcement to identify
    them and bring them to justice. They often focus on vulnerable
    populations, such as those with mental health issues, lack of
    strong family or community ties, or other insecurities.
    Offenders will often disguise their true identity and pretend
    to be of similar age or background to their targeted victims in
    order to gain their trust. Offenders seek an online
    relationship with a child to exploit them for money, for sexual
    images, or to cause them to commit harm to themselves or to
    others.
        When offenders are eventually caught by law enforcement,
    prosecutors charge them with the most appropriate charges.
    However, there are no specific laws to address the terrible and
    shocking acts conducted by gore groups such as 764 and those
    engaged in sextortion.
        Two of the three bills that I introduced today will address
    these offenders. My first bill called Ending Coercion of
    Children and Harm Online, ECCHO for short, will address the
    horrific conduct that these gore groups do when they target
    children to commit violent acts like injuries to animals, self-
    harm, and suicide. The second bill, called the Stop Sextortion
    Act, will hold these people who engage in online threatening
    acts of sextortion toward children accountable under the same
    law which addresses child sexual abuse material.
        Finally, when offenders are convicted of child sex abuse
    material offenses, less than one-third of the cases are
    sentenced within the current sentencing guidelines. Simply put
    then, the current sentencing guidelines are outdated and
    disregarded by most Federal judges because they do not
    adequately account for common offenders' characteristics that
    differentiate the bad from the worst online child exploiters.
    That bill has the title Sentencing Accountability for
    Exploitation, or the SAFE Act. It will require the Sentencing
    Commission to draft and revise the child sexual abuse material
    guidelines to include many of the aggravating factors we now
    see with today's online offenders. Those factors include
    encryption or other masking techniques were used or whether the
    offender was part of an online group to commit the offense,
    just to name a few. This bill will provide the much-needed
    guidance to the Sentencing Commission of our Government to
    overhaul the child sexual abuse material guidelines in a
    meaningful way to distinguish offender behavior.
        Now to Senator Durbin, Ranking Member.

             OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RICHARD J. DURBIN,
               A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF ILLINOIS

        Senator Durbin. Thanks, Mr. Chairman, and glad you are
    holding this hearing. And the fact that you have held this
    hearing and we had similar hearings when I Chaired the
    Committee I think is a message to all who are following us this
    is bipartisan, and it should be, start to finish.
        And we have a real task ahead of us. As Senator Grassley
    describes the legislation that is pending, I can recall the
    hearing for Ketanji Brown Jackson to the Supreme Court, and one
    of the big issues brought up over and over again were the use
    of sentencing guidelines for abuses in this area that were
    written so long ago they didn't reflect the reality of the
    extortion which is going on today.
        And judges of the most conservative political stripe and
    the most liberal political stripe were reaching the same
    conclusion, that those guidelines just don't work anymore. They
    were counting offenses by the number of images. Well, that
    might have made sense when we were talking about 8X10
    photographs. It makes no sense when we are talking about
    technology of today and the videos that are involved. So we
    have got to update that and show the reality of the situation,
    and I think that is something we can all work on together.
        I learned something else. We would get unanimous votes in
    this Committee, if you remember, right? Republicans and
    Democrats would both be voting for the legislation that we
    think would change things for the better. And then it
    disappeared, disappeared between the Committee and the floor.
    And the same is happening now. We make great speeches here. We
    sometimes enact great laws in the Committee.
        But when it comes to taking them to the floor, to enact
    them on the floor and eventually send them over to the House,
    we drop them all completely. That has got to end. There is no
    reason for that. To invite these witnesses, as compelling as
    they are, and then to ignore their testimony when it comes to
    executing on the floor is unacceptable. Let's kind of decide at
    this point that if you are going to have the nerve to give a
    speech here on the subject, you ought to have the nerve to do
    it on the floor and do it repeatedly. So let's have a sense of
    urgency in what we are setting out to do.
        I work with Senator Hawley, in fact, many others, too--
    survivors, law enforcement, advocates--to put together the STOP
    CSAM Act. The bill takes a comprehensive approach to stemming
    the tide of online child exploitation. I have repeatedly said
    we must bring the same sense of urgency to protecting kids in
    the virtual world that we do in the real world.
        But the landscape of online child exploitation is changing
    dramatically by the day. Two trends in particular demand our
    attention, financially motivated sextortion and sadistic online
    exploitation. What once was rare is now epidemic. In 2021,
    NCMEC, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children,
    received a total of 139 cyber tips involving financially
    motivated sextortion, 2021, 139 tips. In the first 6 months of
    this year alone, they have already received 23,000 of these
    tips, plus. Offenders often operated in coordinated criminal
    networks overseas, targeting teenagers in the United States,
    and we will hear specific cases about that. They coerce them
    into sending a sexually explicit image and then threaten to
    release it unless money is paid.
        For too many families, this crime ends in tragedy. NCMEC
    has identified more than 36 young men in the United States who
    have died by suicide after being sextorted. We are joined by
    one of those families. I said hello to Mrs. Woods and thanked
    her for being here. But she lost her son, James, at 17 years
    old when he was targeted. She is here in a courageous capacity,
    and thank you for being here, transforming unbearable loss into
    call for action. That photograph of your son in his track
    outfit in front of the hurdles tells the story. I am sure he
    was a wonderful young man and you cherish his memory by being
    here today.
        Another disturbing trend is a rise in offenders who do not
    just view or trade images of abuse but direct real-time
    torture, encourage escalating violence, groom children to
    produce CSAM and self-harm videos. NCMEC has identified this
    behavior as sadistic online exploitation. The threat is
    accelerating. The numbers tell the story.
        This is an unacceptable systemic failure, and what are we
    going to do about it? We are going to have a hearing. We are
    going to call witnesses. We are going to lament the situation.
    What are we going to do about it? Is there going to be a bill
    in the new session to say that we are so overwhelmed with
    legislation on the floor we don't have time is a joke. Watch
    the Senate and tell me that we don't have the time to take this
    up. We have more than enough time to do it right.
        This Committee has a history of tackling the tough issues.
    Mr. Chairman, it is up to you and me and those Senators on both
    sides of the aisle to make it happen. Thank you.
        Chairman Grassley. Thank you.
        Now, I am going to introduce our witnesses. We will hear
    from them, and then we will have questions. Ms. Tamia Woods and
    her husband Tim are parents of James Woods. James was a good
    student, year-round track and field athlete. At 17, James
    tragically took his own life November 2022 after being extorted
    by someone online for $300. James had sent the online abuser a
    compromising video of himself and was threatened with being
    exposed by the person if James didn't pay the $300 ransom.
        Mrs. Woods and her husband are the founders of the Do It
    for James Foundation. The mission of the foundation is to
    create awareness for kids and their families to prevent similar
    tragedies. We thank you, Mrs. Woods, for being here to share a
    heartbreaking story.
        Jessica Smolar is a former assistant U.S. attorney in the
    Western District of Pennsylvania. With 30 years' experience
    there, Ms. Smolar handled a variety of criminal cases,
    including cases involving child sexual abuse material, child
    exploitation, and cybercrime and national security. Ms. Smolar
    has received several Department of Justice and law enforcement
    awards for her work as an assistant U.S. attorney, including
    2022 Attorney General's Distinguished Service Award and the
    United States Attorney's Victim's Advocate Award for dedication
    and extraordinary contributions in the service of victims.
        Lauren Coffren is executive director of the Exploited
    Children's Division of the National Center for Missing and
    Exploited Children. She has been employed for over 20 years
    with the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children,
    serving in various roles. Ms. Coffren oversees the Exploited
    Children's Division, which operates several programs, including
    the CyberTipline and Child Victim Identification Program. In
    addition, Ms. Coffren started the CSAM Survivors Services
    Program, working to improve the responses to survivors of child
    sexual abuse material.
        We welcome all of you here today, and it is our tradition
    to ask you to stand and swear to this oath.
        [Witnesses are sworn in.]
        Chairman Grassley. Thank you all very much. They all
    affirmatively responded.
        Now, we will start with Mrs. Woods. And don't forget to
    push the button on your----
        Ms. Woods. Yes, sir.
        Chairman Grassley. Proceed.

                 STATEMENT OF TAMIA WOODS, CO-FOUNDER,
              DO IT FOR JAMES FOUNDATION, STREETSBORO, OH

        Ms. Woods. Chairman Grassley, Ranking Member Durbin, and
    Committee Members, thank you for allowing me to speak today. My
    name is Tamia Woods, and I speak on the behalf of myself, my
    husband, Tim, and for our beautiful child, James Timothy Woods,
    forever age 17. I stand before you as a mother whose only child
    was taken by something so preventable, so cruel, and so ignored
    that it should shake every person in this room to their core.
        One of the messages sent to my son, ``I am more determined
    to rot your life than to make it a waste, a trash can, a shame,
    a dishonor, a hell, a real disaster, a hell on earth, and I
    remind you that I am heartless. I have no pity to rot a life as
    well as yours.'' This was one of almost 200 messages sent to my
    child over the span of 19\1/2\ hours between November 18 and
    19, 2022.
        James was the victim of financial sextortion, and though he
    died by suicide, let me be clear, he was murdered.
        James was a beautiful young man with a soul like gold and a
    smile that would light up any room. He would give you the shirt
    off his back. He could figure out anything. He was witty,
    thoughtful, kind, and loved chess.
        James was a high school senior. He wanted to major in pre-
    law, and he was months away from breaking a 40-year-old school
    record in the 110 hurdles. Every time I speak of him, I smile
    because I am grateful God let me borrow his angel for 17\1/2\
    years, but every day I am angry. A woman online befriended
    James on Instagram. She created what every predator knows how
    to build, a safe space. She made him feel comfortable, seen,
    liked. She groomed him. Then she asked if he wanted to see her
    unclothed and exposed herself. She asked him to do the same,
    and like any innocent 17-year-old boy who liked a girl and saw
    no danger, he did. That moment she created became their weapon.
        The attackers came, not one person, but what we believe, at
    least four. For nearly 20 hours, they attacked, threatened,
    terrorized, dismantled my child. Every time he tried to fight
    back and ask, why are you doing this to me, please leave me
    alone, they escalated, sending his image to friends and family,
    telling him he would be labeled a pedophile, telling him his
    future was over, telling him you should just kill yourself. And
    in those last moments, my son, who had everything to live for,
    felt like he had no other choice.
        A day that started with laughter, college friends, and joy
    ended with my husband finding our child unalive in our home in
    the middle of the day. No parent should ever enter a room and
    see that. I stand here because 19\1/2\ hours is not a short
    time in the digital world. It is a lifetime. It is enough time
    for someone to intervene, to flag an account, to cancel
    messages, to report this behavior. Yet no one stepped in, no
    system protecting him, no platform stopped it.
        So my husband and I created the Do It For James Foundation,
    and since the day that James has died, we dedicated our lives
    to speaking out, teaching, and fighting so that no other parent
    feels the pain that sits in our heart every single moment of
    every single day.
        Large corporations continue to argue for rights while
    refusing to take responsibility. We are asking you to put laws
    in place that give us multiple avenues to protect our kids
    because parental controls alone are not enough. Click here to
    opt out at age 13 is not protection. Predators thrive when the
    risk is low but reward is high. Criminals are making billions
    by exploiting our children because we tell our parents, monitor
    your kids better, while platforms refuse to monitor predators
    at all. How dare we lay blame on the victims while criminals
    walk free.
        Today, instead of checking on James' homework, instead of
    mailing him care packages to his college dorm, instead of
    cheering him on for track meets, I hold a picture, a picture of
    my son's photos that he never had a chance to see because that
    is all I have left, 17\1/2\ memories--17\1/2\ years of memories
    but no new ones.
        So I am begging you to stand with us, stand up, do
    something, help us save lives. We may not be able to save them
    all, but with the right laws, with accountability, with real
    consequences, we can make it harder for predators to win. We
    can make it harder for another parent to bury their child.
    Please do it for James. Do it for every child whose name we
    never got a chance to learn.
        Thank you. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Woods appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chairman Grassley [off mic]. God bless you. Thank you. Mrs.
    Smolar.

    STATEMENT OF JESSICA LIEBER SMOLAR, ESQ., FORMER ASSISTANT U.S.
       ATTORNEY, WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA, PITTSBURGH, PA

        Ms. Smolar. Good morning, Chairman Grassley, Ranking Member
    Durbin, and Members of the Committee. Thank you for inviting me
    to testify here today. My name is Jessica Lieber Smolar, and I
    had the honor of serving as an assistant United States attorney
    in the Western District of Pennsylvania for three decades.
    During my career as a Federal prosecutor, I personally handled
    and oversaw hundreds of child exploitation and human
    trafficking investigations and prosecutions. When I first began
    prosecuting these offenses, investigations often centered
    around physical evidence and traditional mail-based exchanges.
        Over time, I witnessed a monumental shift in the types of
    child sexual abuse material, also referred to as CSAM, that
    offenders collected, as well as their methods of collection.
    This shift was not limited to the sheer volume and disturbing
    nature of the material. It also encompassed the tools offenders
    used to acquire, share, and conceal CSAM.
        Today, every child exploitation case involves the criminal
    use of cellular phones and computers. Offenders use these tools
    to stockpile massive quantities of sexually explicit videos and
    images of children, frequently targeting prepubescent children.
    Violent depictions of infants and toddlers being sexually
    exploited were routinely collected by the defendants whom I
    prosecuted.
        Offenders also increasingly used advanced technology and
    platforms for CSAM trafficking. They congregate in online
    communities and darknet forums solely devoted to child
    exploitation. They can now more easily conceal their crimes and
    their identities through encryption, VPNs, the darknet, and
    remote erasure software.
        The law has not kept pace with the rapid technological
    advances or evolving sex offender behavior. United States
    Sentencing Guidelines, Section 2G2.2, was designed when CSAM
    was distributed by mail, so it adds offense enhancements for
    actions common to all CSAM offenders today, like using a
    computer, possessing images of prepubescent minors, or amassing
    many images. The guideline enhancements apply broadly and no
    longer reflect varying levels of offender culpability or risk.
    Legislation is needed to amend the CSAM guidelines.
        The Sentencing Commission's June 2021 report found that
    Section 2G2 is outdated, leading judges to exercise their
    discretion to reduce sentences for child sexual offenders. The
    commission's data for Fiscal Year 2019 showed that less than 30
    percent of non-production child pornography offenders were
    sentenced within the recommended guidelines. This statistic
    reflects broad judicial dissatisfaction and leads to
    inconsistent sentencing nationwide. As Federal prosecutors, my
    colleagues and I often considered plea offers to binding
    sentences to avoid the application of the insufficient
    sentencing guidelines and sentencing disparities.
        There are also emerging crimes that are not fully covered
    by existing criminal statutes, such as those committed by
    members of the violent online network 764. The 764 members
    befriend children sometimes as young as 9 years old through
    popular online platforms and then coerce them into escalating
    sexual, self-destructive, and violent behavior, compelling
    victims to document sex acts, harm siblings and family pets,
    cut and mutilate themselves, or attempt suicide.
        There are no Federal statutes that adequately criminalize
    the coercive conduct of 764 and similar groups. As Federal
    prosecutors, we focused on proving more conventional statutory
    violations, like CSAM possession or production, or distribution
    of obscenity to minors to effectively prosecute these horrific
    crimes.
        Similarly, law enforcement agencies have reported an
    alarming increase in sextortion cases, children being coerced
    into sending sexually explicit images online, like James that
    we just heard about. Perpetrators engage victims in flirtatious
    conversations on social media and gaming platforms where they
    feel comfortable to obtain explicit images. The offenders then
    use the sexually compromising images to blackmail victims for
    more images, or in the case of financial extortion, for money
    or gift cards. They threaten to widely publicize the image to
    the child's friends and family. Children suffer severe
    emotional distress as a result of such sexual extortion, and
    too many have engaged in self-harm or suicide. As Federal
    prosecutors, we found it challenging to effectively charge
    sextortion and financial sextortion. Existing statutes do not
    adequately address the full scope or severe harm of these
    crimes.
        Increasing public understanding of the evolving and
    destructive risk to children online is crucial. Legislation is
    needed to strengthen the legal framework and better support
    those responsible for protecting children.
        I welcome your questions. Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Smolar appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chairman Grassley [off mic]. Thank you, Ms. Smolar.
        Now, Ms. Coffren.

      STATEMENT OF LAUREN COFFREN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, EXPLOITED
      CHILDREN DIVISION, NATIONAL CENTER FOR MISSING & EXPLOITED
                        CHILDREN, ALEXANDRIA, VA

        Ms. Coffren. Good morning, Chairman Grassley, Ranking
    Member Durbin, and Members of the Committee. My name is Lauren
    Coffren, and I am the executive director of the Exploited
    Children Division at the National Center for Missing and
    Exploited Children, or NCMEC. NCMEC is a nonprofit organization
    created in 1984 by child advocates to help find missing
    children, reduce child exploitation, and prevent child
    victimization, and I'm honored to be here today in order to
    share NCMEC's perspective on evolving online child sexual
    exploitation crimes.
        NCMEC is congressionally designated to operate 16 programs
    related to missing and exploited children's issues. One of
    NCMEC's core programs is the CyberTipline, the centralized
    mechanism for the public and online platforms to report
    incidents of child sexual exploitation. Through its work with
    the CyberTipline, NCMEC has seen children sexually exploited
    online for decades.
        Today, we are confronting alarming rates of emerging crimes
    where sexually exploiting a child is not the final objective
    but a means of achieving a larger goal of financial gain or
    incitement of chaos. NCMEC shares this Committee's deep concern
    that offenders will continue to evolve and escalate their
    exploitation of children online unless we act now to hold
    online platforms accountable when they facilitate a child's
    exploitation to ensure safety by design is incorporated into
    development of new technology.
        Today, I'd like to share NCMEC's insights about three
    especially alarming new trends on how children are being
    sexually exploited online. One of the newest trends I'd like to
    highlight is related to online enticement where reports grew by
    192 percent last year. Specifically, we continue to see a rise
    in financial sextortion, where an offender blackmails a child
    for money or gift cards in exchange for not distributing nude
    or sexual images of the child. Unlike offenders who are
    normally sexually motivated, these offenders are driven by
    financial gain.
        As we heard from Tamia Woods just a few moments ago, this
    crime targets teenage boys, and too often, the outcomes are
    tragic. High-performing boys with large social circles like
    James are becoming victims of coerced suicide as a result of
    this crime. Offenders use incessant aggressive threats of
    public exposure, shame, arrest, as if the target--if the
    targeted boys fail to comply with the escalating demands for
    money.
        The second trend NCMEC has identified in the past year is
    sadistic online exploitation. This trend has led to the most
    egregious exploitation that NCMEC has ever seen. Violent online
    offenders work in groups, targeting and manipulating vulnerable
    children, some as young as 12 years old, on popular online
    platforms and gaming sites to create and share sexually
    explicit content, to cut themselves, carving offenders' names
    into their bodies, to harm, to kill animals, to physically or
    sexually abuse other children, including their younger
    siblings, and even to commit suicide. These offenders lure
    children into online relationships, then terrorize them with
    rapid-fire threats to kill the child's family or disclose
    personal information if they don't comply with their demands.
    Reports of these brutal victimizations grew by 200 percent last
    year and continue rising.
        The third trend I'd like to note today is the use of
    generative artificial intelligence, or GAI, to sexually exploit
    children. NCMEC believes we are just beginning to see the true
    impact of GAI on child sexual exploitation. Offenders use GAI
    to create new sexually abusive content, to alter known child
    sexual abuse images, to nudify images of children, and to chat
    about how to entice and exploit children. In the first half of
    this year, NCMEC received over 440,000 reports connected to
    GAI, and we expect to have over 1 million reports by the end of
    this year.
        These three trends tragically affirm that online offenders
    are using evolving technology to exploit children in new and
    more extreme ways. This exploitation will not stop until
    Congress passes laws that close legal gaps, incentivizes
    companies to adopt safety by design, and provide essential
    tools to better protect children. NCMEC appreciates that
    Congress acted decisively to pass laws like the REPORT Act and
    the TAKE IT DOWN Act, and supporting newly introduced bills
    like STOP CSAM Act, ENFORCE Act, the Safe Cloud Storage Act,
    and the GUARD Act. We need to ensure that these pending bills
    are passed, and our laws to protect children keep pace with the
    technological advances.
        Thank you for allowing NCMEC to share our insights with you
    today. We look forward to continuing our work with this
    Committee to share information, to craft legislative solutions,
    and to keep children safer online.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Coffren appears as a
    submission for the record.]
        Chairman Grassley. Before I start my line of questions, I
    would like to enter into the record these [off mic] children
    have committed suicide and were also people that were severely
    harmed because of sextortion in online groups like 764. Is
    there any objection?
        [No response.]
        Chairman Grassley. I hear none, so that will be done.
        [The information appears as a submission for the record.]
        Mrs. Woods, I am going to start with you. Recently, there
    have been several news reports of increased sextortion cases
    and how quickly bad actors can manipulate children into sending
    sexual images and then engage in a campaign to threaten toward
    the children, placing them in impossible situations. Many of
    those children think that suicide is the answer. You have
    promoted changes in various State laws to make sextortion
    illegal after the tragedy of your son. From a parent's point of
    view, why is it important to make these sextortion illegal
    under Federal law?
        Ms. Woods. Well, a number of things. First of all, we have
    to look at sextortion like what it is. It is our children are
    being sexually exploited. They are a sexually assaulted victim.
    And most people in general never speak out. Less than 30
    percent actually speak out about being victimized. We have to
    make sure that not only our children see that we have their
    backs on these issues, but we have to make sure that they know
    that there are resources and laws that back them up as well.
    Our kids need to know that.
        And James never spoke to anyone. He had a wonderful,
    wonderful community that had his back, but yet he never spoke
    up. And so it's laws like this that would back our children and
    influence them to speak up and let them know that they're being
    victimized.
        And people need to be held accountable on top of that. They
    need to know that they're--they shouldn't be comfortable with
    doing the things that they're doing. Right now, they're
    comfortable, and you see more and more people being victimized
    because of that.
        Chairman Grassley. Thank you.
        Ms. Coffren, you have been with the center for 20 years in
    a variety of positions involving online child safety. Describe
    the recent trends involving these violent gore groups like 764
    and how they operate and target children online.
        Ms. Coffren. Thank you so much for your question. These
    sadistic online exploitation, violent online groups, they go by
    various names here that we've heard them referenced as, but
    most often, they're motivated purely by chaos. Their goal is to
    be able to take the--weaponizing our Nation's children to be
    able to create terror, to be able to show just how harmful they
    can be. And they do that oftentimes by seeking out to target
    the most vulnerable, children who may already be demonstrating
    mental health issues, who may be indicating that they have
    thoughts of self-harm, perhaps eating disorders.
        Those children may be looking for solace, for comfort, for
    advice in online platforms and spaces where they can find a
    community. And unfortunately, these offenders are infiltrating
    and targeting those communities to be able to create
    relationships with those children and then to be able to push
    boundaries, to test them, to see if they can hold up a sign
    with their name on it, maybe hold up a sign with a signal or a
    logo. And by doing this, they're testing those boundaries to
    see how far they can push that child. Can they get them to put
    their name on their body? Can they get them to carve the name
    into the body?
        And unfortunately, that incrementalization can often lead
    to really tragic results. Each step along the way can be
    weaponized against that child. And what we often see is a
    swarming kind of effect where multiple offenders will go after
    the same child at one point in time.
        The imagery, the videos, the chats that we are seeing and
    reading are the most graphic that I have ever seen in my 20-
    year history. We are hearing from law enforcement out in the
    field who have said that this is the most disturbing content as
    well. So you're talking about seasoned professionals who are
    really meeting their match with the new and evolving types of
    exploitation that we are seeing.
        Chairman Grassley. Yes. Ms. Smolar, I am going to forget my
    lead in. I want to get to the question because my time is
    running out. Could you share why we need Federal legislation
    specifically to address these gore groups and other individuals
    who engage in sextortion? Share your experiences with us in
    working with investigations involving these groups.
        Ms. Smolar. Thank you, Senator.
        Senator Durbin. Your microphone.
        Ms. Smolar. I apologize.
        Congress has already provided so many important tools to
    those of us in the field like mandatory minimums for crimes
    like receipt and distribution of child pornography or
    production. We need those tools in order to properly hold these
    type of defendants accountable. Right now, when we charge
    crimes like sextortion or 764, across the country, we all
    charge them differently. Sometimes we charge them as online
    threats. Sometimes if we are lucky, we find CSAM and we charge
    them that way. There's no consistency that allows us to
    properly address the specific harm that these actors are
    committing.
        In addition, a lot of these actors are overseas, and it
    would be extremely helpful for those of us who want to
    extradite people here to the United States to hold them
    accountable to have a felony statute that specifically speaks
    to this harm.
        I'm familiar with a case where a defendant was in Germany,
    and Germany had a coercion to harm statute, but we did not.
    They were able to charge that 764 offender there. We could not
    charge him here. That's--that shouldn't happen. We should be
    able to charge these offenders, hold them accountable, and
    deter them from continuing to hurt our children.
        Chairman Grassley. Thanks, all three of you. Senator
    Durbin.
        Senator Durbin. Thanks, Mr. Chairman.
        Ms. Smolar, we have considered the issue you raised in your
    testimony so many times, so many different ways because it can
    be characterized by some that if you don't follow the strict
    sentencing guidelines, that you are soft on crime, that you
    really don't care enough to impose the adequate sentence. What
    you tell us is less than 30 percent of non-production child
    pornography offenders were sentenced within the recommended
    guidelines, reflecting broad judicial satisfaction, 70 percent,
    and inconsistent sentencing nationwide.
        You say, ``As Federal prosecutors, my colleagues and I
    often considered plea offers to binding sentences to avoid the
    application of the insufficient sentencing guidelines and
    disparities.'' Tell me a little more. What are you talking
    about here?
        Ms. Smolar. Especially in cases where you're talking about,
    for example, possession of CSAM where there's no mandatory
    minimum sentence, oftentimes, my colleagues and I--and not just
    in the Western District of Pennsylvania, but nationwide--would
    see sentences that we felt were insufficient. When you're
    talking about possession of CSAM, you are talking about a real
    child being harmed in the most serious way possible. And I
    personally believe that sentences for people who are collecting
    that type of material should be significant in order to protect
    victims and to deter others from collecting it. So it's
    important that the sentencing guidelines are useful to judges.
        Senator Durbin. I understand part of the problem was a
    numeric issue.
        Ms. Smolar. Yes.
        Senator Durbin. Initially, so many instances of objects
    that a person had led to a certain sentencing guideline, but
    now that they are being collected in video form or in different
    technology form----
        Ms. Smolar. Right.
        Senator Durbin [continuing]. The counting numbers really
    doesn't tell the story. Is that your impression?
        Ms. Smolar. It doesn't. All we were--we're talking about
    math. It's not about math. These are about real offenders and
    culpability and risk. For example, what you're referring to is
    one image--one video is 75 images under the sentencing
    guidelines. You start adding up videos to try to get to 600
    images, and you get a 5-point enhancement. Use of a computer is
    a 2-point enhancement. Pre-pubescent children, 2-point
    enhancement. That doesn't really tell the story of these
    offenders and how dangerous they potentially are.
        So legislation will be needed to address, are they on
    specific darknet forums talking about how to abuse children?
    Are they using multiple platforms to try to get to children or
    to share this material? Are they--how severe are the images and
    how many victims are in them? That is not necessarily
    encompassed by the sentencing guidelines right now, so
    legislation is needed to address offender risk.
        Senator Durbin. Ms. Coffren, I was interested with the
    Chairman's question that you responded that sometimes the
    object of this exploitation is chaos. It is not financial. Tell
    me a little more on that. What is the value of this perpetrator
    wasting all of these hours leading to the self-harm of a young
    person or worse?
        Ms. Coffren. Right. What we are--thank you so much for that
    question, Senator. What we are seeing is these loosely
    coordinated groups that you've been referencing like 764 and
    some of these other that we're referencing as sadistic online
    are fueled and motivated by being able to have clout notoriety
    for the impact of their actions. This means it extends much
    more beyond just CSAM. It is how can they use children to harm
    themselves or the others and then harm the community as well.
    So we also see children being coerced into planning school
    shootings or threatening their communities as well that are
    also offshoots of this type of work.
        So child sexual exploitation has actually been hijacked as
    one methodology for a larger way of trying to be able to use
    children against the community and for shock and for awe. The
    more that we talk about this, unfortunately, we feed their
    desire for that notoriety for the impact that they're having,
    and these sometimes called nihilistic violent groups as well is
    really fueled by something that we are just not that familiar
    with operating with, which is pure chaos.
        Senator Durbin. Ms. Woods, how long do you think your son
    was being exploited before he finally lost his life?
        Ms. Woods. It was 19\1/2\ hours. He received 200 messages
    in 19\1/2\ hours with what we believe four different people
    attacking him at one time.
        Senator Durbin. Do you have any idea where the source of
    these attacks goes?
        Ms. Woods. His murderers are in Ivory Coast. And we of
    course don't have--we--we're told we'll never receive justice
    for James.
        Senator Durbin. I am so sorry for that.
        Ms. Woods. Thank you.
        Senator Durbin. Thank you for being here, all three of you.
        Chairman Grassley. Thank you, Senator Durbin. Senator
    Graham.
        Senator Graham. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for yet another
    very emotional hearing about a topic that we constantly talk
    about and do little about.
        I am perplexed. I can understand having differences on
    healthcare and taxes and you name it, we have a different--all
    of us agree on this pretty much. What is going on in the Senate
    and the House where no matter who is in charge, nothing really
    happens? I said this when I was Chairman.
        So here we are in 2025. This 764 group--how do you say your
    last name?
        Ms. Smolar. Smolar.
        Senator Graham. So I want to acknowledge the FBI and the
    District of Columbia U.S. Attorney's Office brought a case
    against two people. Are you all familiar with that? That is a
    good start, right? Kash Patel is focused on this group. Should
    they be domestic terrorists under U.S. law?
        Ms. Smolar. It's a good question, Senator. I can tell you
    even within the FBI, there are cross-programmatic focuses on
    this group because----
        Senator Graham. I mean, do you think they should be
    domestic terrorists? If these people are not domestic
    terrorists, who would be?
        Ms. Smolar. A lot of----
        Senator Graham. You all both just told us that they are
    trying to bring down society by harming our children and
    exploiting them. Why shouldn't they be domestic terrorists?
        Ms. Smolar. I do know that they have been charged in at
    least one case as domestic terrorists.
        Senator Graham. Well, I would like to put a list. Ms.
    Coffren, are you okay with making this group domestic
    terrorists?
        Ms. Coffren. I think when we're looking at how individuals
    are weaponizing our children, a lot more research needs to be
    done.
        Senator Graham. Not really. No, not really.
        Ms. Coffren. Certainly----
        Senator Graham. No. This phone, do you think it is a
    dangerous product for children, Ms. Woods?
        [Holds up cell phone.]
        Ms. Woods. Yes, I do. And to answer----
        Senator Graham. What is more dangerous, smoking or this?
        Ms. Woods. Oh, the phone, of course.
        Senator Graham. Do you agree with that?
        Ms. Smolar. I do.
        Senator Graham. Do you agree with that?
        Ms. Coffren. Without a doubt.
        Senator Graham. Okay. Well, I am not urging people to
    smoke. I don't think kids should smoke.
        Why don't we label this a dangerous product and at least
    inform consumers better? Do you agree that is a good idea?
        Ms. Woods. I agree.
        Senator Graham. Okay. There are so many good ideas, and I
    want to compliment this Committee, who is awfully divided, for
    coming up with one good idea after another from, you know,
    Senator Hawley, Blackburn, all of us, Cornyn, everybody is
    working together. Nobody has been better on this than Senator
    Durbin.
        So February is the 30th anniversary of Section 230. Are you
    familiar with Section 230? Ms. Woods, are you familiar with it?
        Ms. Woods. Yes, sir.
        Senator Graham. You really can't sue anybody that was
    involved in helping these people murder your son, can you?
        Ms. Woods. No.
        Senator Graham. Do you all agree that it is time to revisit
    Section 230?
        Ms. Smolar. Yes.
        Ms. Coffren. Yes.
        Senator Graham. Do you believe it is time to open the
    courtrooms to people who have been harmed by this behavior?
        Ms. Woods. Yes.
        Ms. Smolar. Yes.
        Ms. Coffren. Yes.
        Senator Graham. Do you agree that Section 230 gives a legal
    pass on the most bizarre, harmful behavior in the country, and
    30 years later, we should revisit Section 230?
        Ms. Woods. Yes.
        Ms. Smolar. Yes.
        Ms. Coffren. Yes.
        Senator Graham. Okay. Me too. So what are we going to do?
    Here is what I am going to do. I am going to write a letter to
    Senator Thune and Senator Schumer, both good men, and in
    February, we should have like a social media week where we take
    all these good ideas and we dedicate a week or 2 weeks to doing
    nothing on the floor but this, to try to take these laws that
    everybody coming up with and put them in a big package and put
    us all on record as are we all talk, or are we willing to act?
    Do you all like that idea?
        Ms. Woods. I sure do.
        Ms. Coffren. Great idea.
        Senator Graham. We will have like a couple of months to let
    the country know, tune in in February, we are going to do some
    things to protect your children and see where the Senate is on
    this. Would you support that idea?
        Ms. Woods. Yes.
        Ms. Smolar. Yes.
        Ms. Coffren. Yes.
        Senator Graham. Okay, good. So I would like my colleagues
    to think creatively what should be on that list, but come
    February on the 30th anniversary of Section 230, I would like
    to have an effort on the floor of the Senate to deal with the
    dark side of Section 230. So I think that would be very, very
    helpful.
        Now, the cost of doing business, do you agree with me the
    more likely you are to go to jail, a lot of people avoid that
    area?
        Ms. Woods. Yes.
        Ms. Smolar. Yes.
        Senator Graham. Do you agree with me that the more likely
    you are to get sued if you put out a bad product, the more
    likely you are to try to change that product?
        Ms. Coffren. Yes.
        Ms. Smolar. Yes.
        Ms. Woods. Yes.
        Senator Graham. Do you all agree that we have, as a Nation,
    miserably failed our children, that we have hearings and we
    talk and we have done very little to protect them as of this
    date?
        Ms. Woods. Yes.
        Ms. Smolar. Yes.
        Ms. Coffren. Yes.
        Senator Graham. That is a damning indictment of all of us.
    Thank you.
        Chairman Grassley. Senator Hirono.
        Senator Hirono. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you to our panel for testifying.
        And Ms. Woods, our hearts go out to you for the tragic loss
    of your son.
        As I look at this issue, and as mentioned by my colleagues,
    that we have been wrestling with child exploitation, which is
    only getting worse. It is not getting any better. It is getting
    worse and acknowledged by all of us the sense of frustration
    because this is actually an issue that receives bipartisan
    focus and a desire on our part to do more than what we have
    done so far. And I am looking at this issue by way of focusing
    on, I think there is a prevention aspect to it. There is a
    prosecution aspect to it. And as Ms. Smolar says, you know, the
    laws have not kept up with all of the kinds of ways that these
    exploiters coming up to evade prosecution, so there is a
    prosecution part.
        And then I would say there is a civil remedies part, which
    is really looking at Section 230 and removing the kind of total
    immunity that Section 230 provides.
        So if I look at the prevention side, what can we do to
    prevent the kind of tragedy that overtook James?
        Ms. Woods. So it's a number of things. I will say from the
    Do It For James Foundation, over the last 3 years, we averaged
    less than $10,000 in grants. We're not getting approved to even
    do the prevention. It's all on the backs--my husband and I have
    given hundreds of thousands of dollars each year to make sure
    that we do so. That's one.
        Two, we have to make this a demand to talk about it in
    schools. My husband and I have talked to well over 200,000
    children. And because we made them aware of something they knew
    about but didn't know quite it was illegal, nor did they know
    what it was called, it led to four arrests and two being
    investigated and hundreds of kids being saved by dying by
    suicide.
        So we have to make sure that not only are you all educated,
    not only are law enforcement agents educated, but also our
    children need to be included in this education so that we know
    what to do if we were ever presented by these murderers out
    there, that we can let the kids know that they need to call
    NCMEC and make sure that they have references that they need
    and resources.
        Senator Hirono. I couldn't agree with you more because it
    is the children who are being targeted for exploitation. And if
    our children are not aware that if this happens to them and
    they are targeted, that there are places to go, that they ought
    to inform because I would think that if you are a child and you
    are the target, you don't want to talk about it. You are trying
    to hide it, whatever is happening.
        So would the three of you agree that we need to do a lot
    better to get the communities and the children much more able
    to call out what is happening to them? And what is it that we
    need to do? Do we provide grants to the Department of Justice
    and make sure that both DOJ and Homeland Security pay attention
    to these horrible crimes that are happening? And rather than
    focusing so much of their resources on immigration, that they
    ought to--DOJ and Homeless Security should have the resources
    to go after this kind of exploitation.
        But I just wanted to get the sense from all three of you,
    you know, what specifically should we be doing on the
    prevention side of the scale? And then for Ms. Smolar to tell
    us what we can do to provide law enforcement the better tools
    to prosecute these crimes. So do you want to share some of
    your--grants to organizations, yes. Any other ideas on the
    prevention side?
        Ms. Smolar. Sorry. Thank you, Senator. In addition--we
    can't prosecute our way out of this. That is clear. We do need
    the tools to be able to properly prosecute these crimes, but
    education is key. I can't tell you how many people I told I was
    coming here today to talk about 764 and they look at me
    blankly. They don't know what it is. We need more public
    education of children, teachers, coaches, clergy, people who
    interact with children who could maybe look at their arms, see
    if there are strange cuts, see if they look different, if
    they're acting differently.
        PSAs are important. FBI has issued a number of PSAs on this
    group, but I don't even think that's enough. We need more
    public education in the schools, in the places where children
    congregate so that they are not afraid to come forward and
    report these crimes.
        Senator Hirono. Ms. Coffren.
        Ms. Coffren. Prevention is also detection. So what we need
    to be able to see is companies able to detect some of these
    keywords that are happening in chats, flagging for that, making
    the kinds of reports, allowing law enforcement to investigate
    this before those offenders are able to go on, create new
    profiles, and blackmail, sextort, or coerce other children. So
    I think taking a look, too, as well as to updating some of the
    guidelines around what it takes to report. Are technology
    companies required to be transparent about what it is that
    they're doing behind the scenes as well? All of those efforts
    can actually help to save lives if we know what steps are being
    taken behind the scenes.
        Senator Hirono. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Grassley. Thank you, Senator Hirono.
        Now, Senator Cornyn.
        Senator Cornyn. Thank you all for being here. This is the
    third hearing we have had on this topic, and I am appreciative
    of the Chairman and for scheduling it. But it strikes me we
    need to actually do something, do something more.
        The problem is, Ms. Smolar, you mentioned all the different
    sources of this information, CSAM and others, including the
    dark web. But as you just said, we can't prosecute ourselves
    out of this. Senator Graham said, well, maybe we ought to
    create an opportunity to sue. But could you just briefly
    describe the challenges, including international sources of
    this information and jurisdictional and other legal constraints
    that make that impractical?
        Ms. Smolar. There are a lot of challenges in handling these
    cases. The darknet, VPNs, the smarter, more sophisticated
    offenders are able to hide their identities through encryption
    and through VPNs. So it is a huge challenge for law enforcement
    to identify the perpetrators here.
        In addition, resources is always a problem. International
    offenders is an issue. You know, we had international offenders
    in a lot of the cybercrime cases that I handled, and we would
    get together with law enforcement in many, many countries and
    discuss these matters. That doesn't always happen in this area,
    and it's something that should because these crimes are
    international in scope. These offenders are coming from outside
    the U.S. a lot of----
        Senator Cornyn. Well, Ms. Woods, you said your son's
    murderer was from Africa?
        Ms. Woods. Yes, Ivory Coast. And we don't have an
    extradition treaty. They stated that they'll never hand over
    any of their natural born citizens.
        Senator Cornyn. Well, it seems to me like we are trying to
    play catchup, but the technology and the bad guys are outpacing
    us at almost every turn. And, of course, I know Senator Hawley
    has a bill to deal with chatbots, but just to folks who are not
    familiar with that name, these are--this is technology that
    simulates human interaction, so somebody actually thinks that
    they are talking, perhaps, to a human being. And we can only
    imagine the uses to which that technology could be put to
    damage our children or cause them to hurt themselves or take
    their lives.
        So Australia has passed a law that says that children under
    the age of 16 can't get access to social media accounts. What
    do you think about that, Ms. Woods?
        Ms. Woods. Well, I would like to say that we----
        Senator Cornyn. I know your son was 17, but----
        Ms. Woods. Yes.
        Senator Cornyn [continuing]. Do you think it would help?
        Ms. Woods. Oh, yes, yes. I think that we--first of all, Tim
    and I did an article for Australia in 2023 when our son passed,
    and they didn't have the actual law in place. Since then, they
    made sure that they had a law. Even though our son was 17 years
    of age, we have to look at the--we allowed him to be online
    before that age. And what if we would have had these laws in
    place? It would have still made a difference. And even though
    we lost our only child, that doesn't mean that I'm not going to
    stand here and stand up for anybody else's kids----
        Senator Cornyn. Of course.
        Ms. Woods [continuing]. Because you all's kids are my
    kids----
        Senator Cornyn. Of course.
        Ms. Woods [continuing]. So I'm going to make sure that
    things get done.
        Senator Cornyn. Well, God bless you for doing that.
        Ms. Woods. Thank you.
        Senator Cornyn. Ms. Coffren, NCMEC has been the leader in
    this area when it comes to child exploitation. Do you think
    that Congress should consider a law banning the use of social
    media for children 16 and younger?
        Ms. Coffren. Certainly, that is one tool that would be kind
    of in the arsenal of being able to address this. I think we
    have to look at the different types of age restrictions, age
    assurances, age gatings. There's an awful lot of complexity
    that goes around into that, and so we need to be able to look
    at ways of holding the social media companies and online
    platforms responsible, as well as the device or the app stores,
    as well as ensuring that there's better parental controls. We
    see----
        Senator Cornyn. Well, they have got technology that I just
    barely struggle to understand. And certainly, they would be in
    the best position, would they not, Ms. Smolar, to know what is
    happening on their own platforms?
        Ms. Smolar. Correct. Although I will state that in a lot of
    these crimes, the offenders will find a child, for example, on
    Snapchat or Instagram, but then they will move them to a
    different application like Signal where we have no control over
    that.
        Senator Cornyn. Ms. Coffren, if Senator Grassley will allow
    me, you mentioned something that intrigued me when you said
    some of these platforms--some of the information or some of
    these individuals are inciting to chaos. What did you mean by
    that?
        Ms. Coffren. So they're motivated purely by a goal, not
    sexual exploitation of a child. They are not the traditional,
    you know, pedophile that we might think about. Their goal is to
    cause disruption in our communities, to have us holding
    hearings today talking about just how difficult it is to think
    about our children being harmed for shock and for awe.
        And so when that is the new type of offender, we need new
    types of tools. Looking at the types of signals that exist on
    the social media platforms, the chats, how people are operating
    is going to be really essential to try to stay current to these
    kind of evolving statuses of new offenders and new motivations.
        Senator Cornyn. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Grassley. Thank you. Senator Blackburn.
        Senator Blackburn. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And as I spoke with each of the three of you earlier, I am
    just so grateful for your work, for your commitment, and your
    willingness to talk about this. And it has been so interesting
    to me as someone who has worked to protect children and to
    really focus on what was happening with technology and in this
    virtual space. And it is astounding to me that there are laws
    in the physical space that protect children. You cannot
    endanger a child. You can't sell them alcohol. You can't sell
    them tobacco. You cannot expose them to pornography. If you
    were a liquor store and you were selling to kids, they would
    padlock your store and take away your license.
        But in the virtual space, our children are vulnerable 24/7,
    365. And I think during the COVID pandemic, many parents
    realized what was happening with the phone and their child.
    That is why you are seeing bell to bell, no phones in schools.
    That is why you are seeing other laws take place.
        And Ms. Woods, as I said to you, I am just heartbroken for
    you. As a mother and a grandmother and having teenage
    grandsons, this is a fear, an absolute fear that parents have
    because the sextortion schemes and the targeting of young boys,
    it's like something that happens within a matter of hours and
    days.
        And I appreciated your comment about your son being
    murdered. He was targeted, and then he was literally cyber
    bullied to death.
        And this is why we need to pass the Kids Online Safety Act.
    This is why my REPORT Act--and Ms. Coffren, you mentioned
    that--was signed into law. And more needs to be done to protect
    children in the virtual space.
        Ms. Woods, I want to come to you and just give you a minute
    to talk about why these platforms should be required to force
    safety by design and to put that burden on these social media
    platforms to root out these bad actors.
        Ms. Woods. Yes, so there is a number of things that I would
    like to say with that. First of all, social media and different
    applications actually, I say, save face. So they say that they
    have parental controls, but did anyone know that on Google, if
    your child is 12 years old and once they turn 13, Google
    directly messages your child and tells them that they no longer
    need parental control and they can click here to opt out.
    That's what I mean by parental controls are not enough. You--we
    are put at a--and made to have a responsibility as parents to
    protect our children in every way, and yet there's other
    obstacles involved that intervene in us parenting our child in
    the most appropriate way.
        The other thing too is that by social media actually making
    sure that we have laws in place like the social media act,
    parental act, is making sure that our--we can monitor our kids
    better, but when there is acronyms like--when my son said,
    ``I'm going to kill myself,'' it would have alerted me. It
    would have alerted any parent that had lost their children's
    lives. And it would have told me something's wrong. I wish that
    even today, 3 years later, that I would have known half of the
    things that I would have had or even be put in a position where
    I could have taught my son to come to us in certain manners. He
    came to us for whatever, if there was a hole in his sack,
    whatever he needed. But yet our social media platforms took the
    time to not say anything.
        Senator Blackburn. So what advice would you give to parents
    right now, sitting there today, parents of teens?
        Ms. Woods. My advice that I would give to parents is to
    talk to your children about sextortion and any other child
    exploitation. I knew nothing about it. Every parent that lives
    here today that has a child has a privilege I did not have. It
    is free. Let's talk about it. Let's educate our children. And
    what I would say to children is be vulnerable one more time,
    one more time. Yes, you may not have made the best decision. We
    are all that way. We make mistakes. You matter enough through
    your mistakes. I don't care what it is. You speak up. You say
    something. You stand up for yourself because we can make sure
    that we have your back no matter what. I would give anything to
    have my son back. And if they have to learn, if they have to
    see James' face, if they have to see my tears, I'm going to
    make sure that it happens. If it means that I can save your
    grandchildren, I'm going to do it.
        Senator Blackburn. Thank you.
        Chairman Grassley. Senator Blackburn, thank you. Senator
    Whitehouse.
        Senator Whitehouse. Thanks very much, Chairman. Thanks very
    much for doing this hearing. I think it is very useful. I want
    to welcome and thank all of the witnesses.
        Ms. Woods, I am sorry that this has become so personal for
    you. There is really not much that is worse than what you have
    been through, and I really admire that you have come here to
    talk about it because it can't be easy, and I am grateful to
    you.
        And Ms. Smolar, as a former United States attorney, I am
    always impressed by the assistant United States attorney who
    did the real work, and I am delighted that you are here.
        And Ms. Coffren, thank you for your wonderful advocacy.
        I want to pick up a little bit on where I understand
    Senator Graham was with respect to getting rid of Section 230.
    I strongly believe that Section 230 has long outlived its use,
    and it is now a real vessel for evil that needs to come to an
    end. The laws that Section 230 protects these big platforms
    from are very often laws that go back to the common law of
    England that we inherited when this country was initially
    founded. I mean, these are long-lasting, well-tested, important
    legal constraints that have met the test of time, not by the
    year or by the decade, but by the century. And yet because of
    this crazy Section 230, these ancient and highly respected
    doctrines just don't reach these people. And it really makes no
    sense that if your're an internet platform, you get treated one
    way. You do the exact same thing, and you are a publisher, you
    get treated a completely different way.
        And so I think that the time has come. I think it is pretty
    widely known that there were a core four of us ready to proceed
    with a bipartisan bill, two and two. And a lot of work,
    important work, good work, valuable work, has gone into making
    sure that other Members of the Committee and other Members of
    the Senate have a chance to look at that and decide whether
    they want to join or not. And I am at the stage right now where
    I think we just need to go. We just need to file that bill and
    start moving, and everybody else can make up their decision
    whether they want to join or not. But continuing to delay while
    people deliberate whether to join or not, you know, everybody
    has had plenty of time. I think this is fish-or-cut-bait time.
    So I hope very much that we can proceed. I hope it is more than
    core four. I hope it is core 8 or core 10 or core 12 or perhaps
    even unanimous on the Committee.
        But it really makes no sense. And stories like Ms. Woods
    and like the story of the Rhode Island family that was affected
    show how alone and stranded people are when they don't have the
    chance to even get justice. You know, it is bad enough to have
    to live through the tragedy. It is bad enough to have to bear
    for the rest of your life that loss. But to be told by a law of
    Congress you can't get justice because of the platform, not
    because the law is wrong, not because the rule is wrong, not
    because this is anything new, simply because the wrong type of
    entity created this harm.
        And, you know, I look at what was done with the lawsuit by
    the Connecticut families whose children were killed in grade
    school and the accountability of a loudmouth for having whipped
    up the false theory that that whole thing was a fake, was
    staged, that they were props, that their children weren't
    actually killed, you know, you are never going to make that get
    better for those parents, but at least they know that the world
    listened. They at least know that they got the chance in an
    honest courtroom, and they at least know that they got a
    victory out of it. They got a win, and the person responsible
    for that really vile misconduct had to face an enormous,
    enormous civil judgment that he is still being pursued over.
    And that is not nothing.
        So that is my statement, and let's hope that we can
    finally, finally get this 230 thing moving in this Committee.
    Thank you.
        Chairman Grassley. Thank you. Now, Senator Hawley.
        Senator Hawley. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank
    you to the witnesses for being here.
        And Ms. Woods, I want to start with you. And I just want to
    say to you and to your husband, thank you for your courage and
    your advocacy. And thank you for sharing with us just a little
    piece of the life of your beautiful son. I am a father of three
    myself, two boys and a little girl, and my oldest boy is now a
    teenager. He just turned 13. And so as I look out at the
    landscape that he is coming into in social media, I am
    terrified by it.
        But I just know, parent to parent, your son's life is
    changing the world. He is changing the world. And you giving
    him voice, as you and your husband are doing, that is the only
    thing that is going to make change here in Washington, DC, I
    can tell you, because who currently has a hammer hold on the
    U.S. Senate are the big technology companies who spend endless
    amounts of money to control the Senate. And let's just be
    honest, we may as well put a sign on the floor of the Senate
    that says ``property of Big Tech'' because nothing moves across
    that floor, in my observation, nothing that they don't want.
    They spend money to control and to buy access and influence.
        And the only thing that will break that, I believe, is the
    truth of experiences like yours and the voice of your sons to
    confront lawmakers with the fact that unless we act and do
    something, unless we stand up to these corporate interests,
    more and more children like yours will lose their lives, will
    lose their futures, will lose their hope. So I just want to say
    thank you because you are the tip of the spear. I mean, you are
    what is making the change.
        I noticed in your testimony, your written testimony--I was
    reading it just a second ago--I noticed you pointed out that,
    as to your boy, no system protected him, and no platform
    stopped it. And then you pointed out Meta, for example, has
    features that flag all inappropriate language that we use when
    making posts, and all that happens almost instantaneously. But
    as you said a moment ago, nobody flagged anything for you. None
    of those systems were deployed to help your son. And I think
    the reality of that is is that Meta didn't care about deploying
    systems to help your son because it didn't make them any money.
    If it makes them money, they are happy to do it.
        Ms. Woods. Right.
        Senator Hawley. But it didn't make any money for them to
    help your son, and so they just stood by.
        And I just want to point out something that Meta is doing
    right now. Let's take a look at the Meta chatbot policy. Not
    only is Meta not protecting kids like your boy, Meta actually
    is looking to make money by targeting children who are your
    son's age and younger. This is a document that was leaked by a
    Meta whistleblower that is their policies when it comes to
    chatbots with children. And if you look here, the first line,
    it says, ``It is acceptable''--this is Meta's own words. ``It
    is acceptable to engage a child in conversations that are
    romantic or sensual.'' So here Meta is with a deliberate policy
    to target children, teenagers your boy's age and younger, for
    the purposes of exploiting them. Why? So they can make money.
        [Poster is displayed.]
        What are the consequences of that? Well, let's look at
    another young man who is just a few years younger than your
    boy. Sewell Setzer was his name. Sewell was 14. He is a
    handsome kid. This was a great kid. I have gotten to know his
    parents. And much like your son, Ms. Woods, I mean, this is
    just a fantastic kid. He also was the victim of sextortion. The
    difference with your son was is that his sextortion was pursued
    by a chatbot. It wasn't even human. You know, your son's
    killers are beyond the reach. They are in a different country.
    They are hiding behind all of the various laws and treaties
    and, of course, the platforms themselves.
        This young man's killer, an AI chatbot, can't be held
    accountable because they have got special protections that no
    other corporation in the country or in the world gets. The
    chatbot that engaged with young Sewell engaged him in sexting
    activities and then urged him to commit suicide, told him how
    to commit suicide, and tragically, he did it.
        And his parents, much like you now, are giving voice to
    him, to his legacy. But the true justice that will come for
    boys like Sewell, for young men like Sewell, for young men like
    your son, James, and for other young Americans out there is we
    have to be able to hold these technology companies accountable.
    And that is why I have introduced legislation that will prevent
    the AI companies from targeting minors with chatbots.
        [Poster is displayed.]
        It is time for this Committee to mark up this bill. Senator
    Britt is a cosponsor. Senator Blumenthal is a cosponsor.
    Senator Murphy is a cosponsor. My point is it is bipartisan.
    This Committee needs to mark that bill up, and we need to
    protect our kids from the profiteering of these corporations.
        And we need to do something else. This Committee passed
    unanimously, unanimously legislation that would allow the
    parents of victims of child sex abuse material, allow them to
    sue companies that put that child sex abuse material online,
    that host it, knowingly or recklessly. We passed it
    unanimously. It is languishing on the Senate floor, unanimously
    out of the Judiciary Committee months ago, and it is sitting on
    the floor of the Senate. Why? Because Big Tech fears it. They
    don't want it to move.
        I call now today on Senate leadership, which is controlled
    by my party, I call on them to put that bill on the floor.
    Listen to the testimony of Ms. Woods. Heed, heed the witness of
    her son. Heed the witness of Sewell Setzer. Listen to the young
    Americans whose lives have been lost and destroyed by
    predators. Put this bill on the floor. There is no excuse for
    further delay. No amount of money from Big Tech can ever
    sanction or make right our inability to act, our failure to do
    so.
        This Committee has acted. It is time for the Senate to act.
    And it would be a travesty, inexcusable for this Congress to
    close out this year without taking action to protect our
    children.
        Thank you again all for being here. Thank you, Ms. Woods,
    especially for you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Grassley. Senator Klobuchar.
        Senator Klobuchar. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        I think that sentiment that Senator Hawley expressed that
    many of us feel about the bills that have come through the
    Committee and the work that we have done. We know that one bill
    that did pass that you noted, Ms. Coffren--thank you--was the
    TAKE IT DOWN Act that I authored with Senator Cruz, signed into
    law by President Trump. And as you know, that criminalizes the
    distribution of and threats to distribute nonconsensual
    intimate images, whether they are AI created or real.
        And I would also add, to echo some of my colleagues,
    particularly Senator Graham, that it is long past time to
    repeal Section 230. At the beginning of his efforts on that
    front, I had thought, well, no, maybe we can put in these rules
    in place and the tech companies will work with us, and that
    just hasn't happened. The opposite has happened. And as we
    approach this 30-year anniversary, maybe it is time to do a
    major assessment, which takes for any parent about 1 minute to
    realize the harm that has been caused by all of this.
        I would start with you, Ms. Woods. Thank you for your
    moving testimony. Can you talk about why even the threat of
    nonconsensual distribution of explicit images can be tragic,
    and why it is so vital that the law covers threats, as the TAKE
    IT DOWN Act does, as well as the reality?
        Ms. Woods. So it's a number of things. First of all, our
    children aren't just handing out the nudes. They are being
    coerced into providing them with--in regards to creating safe
    spaces and different things of that sort. Once the threat
    behind the nude comes, it's not just the nude being in
    existence. It's all of the threats behind it to where they're
    questioning what they're actually doing, and they're becoming
    desperate and willing to do whatever they can to get rid of
    that image. It is embarrassing to them.
        They--we tell kids all the time, if you put it on the
    internet, it won't go away. You--my son, in particular, was
    threatened. He was actually slated to be No. 1 in the State of
    Ohio in 110 hurdles, and they told him he would never run track
    again. They told him he would be labeled a pedophile because he
    was under 18, and they did have a nude photo of him. It becomes
    far more than the embarrassment of the actual picture but the
    actual torture that comes after the picture.
        And so by them being able to have TAKE IT DOWN as an
    option, it takes a weight off of them, and they are able to
    address all the other issues that come after it. But once we
    take that photo away, then we can battle everything else, and I
    think that helps them with that.
        Senator Klobuchar. Thank you. Thank you. As you know, Ms.
    Coffren, the TAKE IT DOWN Act gives victims not only their
    rights with regard to the people doing this, but the rights to
    demand that the social media platforms take these images down.
    I just wrote a piece today in The New York Times about AI and
    just how important it is to allow the States to keep doing
    their work while we are waiting on the leadership to bring up
    these bills for a vote.
        And I just believe that if you are not going to do anything
    federally, you better do something in the States, but also that
    you have got to hold these platforms liable. And could you talk
    about that?
        Ms. Coffren. Sure. The biggest threat that children face is
    not necessarily a criminal justice proceeding or the fear of
    what is going to be happening next. They just want their images
    down. So the threats that these bad actors are using against
    them is actually a recirculation of the same diatribes that
    we've been telling children for years in a prevention-type
    method. Don't do this action, or once it's out there, it's
    always out there, and you'll never get it back. That has to
    change.
        The TAKE IT DOWN Act changes that significantly by
    requiring that company to, within 48 hours, to be able to be
    removing that. Children need to know that they have that right
    for that content to come down so that the threat to
    recirculate, there's power taken away from that, and the child
    gets that power back. So that act is really revolutionary
    because historically what we've seen is companies taking, you
    know, a week, 2 weeks, sometimes not remove this at all.
        And the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children
    publishes our data about the companies that we send notices
    for, those companies that take it down, how long it takes them
    to take it down, and which companies choose not to. All that
    information is public, and we're trying to make sure that
    people can find that and are aware.
        Senator Klobuchar. That will be very, very helpful for all
    of us.
        Ms. Smolar, last short question here, a little related, but
    different topic. Senator Blackburn and I introduced the
    National Human Trafficking Data base Act to establish a
    National Human Trafficking Data base at the DOJ's Office for
    Victims of Crime to incentivize States to report data, a little
    bit along the lines of what we are hearing from Ms. Coffer on
    the TAKE IT DOWN bill. Can you talk about the data sharing in
    this area and how it can empower law enforcement to protect
    victims of human trafficking?
        Ms. Smolar. Yes, thank you, Senator. Human traffickers move
    victims across State lines all the time. That's how they make
    money. That is how they get more victims, by crossing State
    lines. So having nationwide data for law enforcement is
    invaluable to be able to talk to their colleagues in different
    States to get information on different traffickers, on victims.
    We try to rescue victims all the time. So without that data,
    you can't do that.
        Chairman Grassley. Senator Moody.
        Senator Moody. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this
    hearing. I really appreciate it.
        Ms. Woods, Ms. Smolar, Ms. Coffer, I cannot thank you
    enough for being here today. My name is Ashley Moody. I became
    the first mom of a school kid ever on Florida's cabinet when I
    became the attorney general. My kid was still in school, and I
    debated how that was going to be a challenge. But ultimately,
    that challenge of balancing that and making that work became my
    biggest driver.
        And I am listening to you guys talk this morning and I am
    so grateful we have people like you willing to speak up and
    stay focused on this and not let up because I am telling you,
    the focus of large corporations on profit, that never lets up,
    and that is a fight all in and of itself. In fact, if you are a
    representative of a large tech platform or any of the
    associations or represent them in government affairs, could you
    please stand up?
        I just would like the Chairman to note, not one person is
    here for this testimony to listen to a mother who lost her only
    child. Thank you for showing up.
        Let me tell you when they do show up. In 2004 because
    Congress has done nothing. Oh, and you know what we did get
    passed this last year? It was because of a mom showed up in
    Congress and said, you have to get this done. Melania Trump
    said, show up, we have to pass this, the TAKE IT DOWN Act. We
    have got to pass it. And it did because a mom showed up and
    didn't let up.
        You have heard from multiple people say, Congress is doing
    nothing, that Congress is under the thumb of Big Tech because
    of financial influence. Lindsey Graham said, ``How is this
    happening? Maybe we do something next year.'' In fact, he said,
    ``Nothing really happens.''
        So because Congress hasn't done anything, what have we had
    to do in the States? When I was the only mom on the Florida
    cabinet of a school-aged kid, we passed legislation in Florida.
    We were one of the very first States to protect kids online in
    2024. We protected young kids. We got it done. We were one of
    the first States. Now other States have had to follow suit
    because what happens in Congress? Nothing really happens. And
    we did it.
        But you know where these Big Tech companies show up? Their
    lawyers, their lobbyists, their government representatives, you
    know where they do show up? In court to fight us when we get
    something done. So when we passed it in Florida, and I showed
    up in court when they sued us to overturn the law and spent all
    of that money to sue when the State actually did something to
    stand up for their kids, we fought it. And I am proud to tell
    you--they showed up there to fight us. I am proud to tell you
    fighting hard, staying focused, staying persistent, showing up,
    we just got to win. We just got to win in court.
        In fact, I am proud to tell you that that piece of
    legislation got upheld in the 11th Circuit, and I think we are
    going to win it. It just goes to show you, you can do
    something. We looked at all those other States that had tried
    something that got blocked, and we took that into account when
    we passed our law, and now we are winning in court, and we are
    winning against those companies.
        And I am telling you what, I am watching you. You have
    blended everything from being a mother--I was a former Federal
    prosecutor. I have worked on human trafficking, constantly led
    the human trafficking group within our statewide Human
    Trafficking Council. I won't give up. And we are making
    progress in this fight. And now I just got appointed United
    States Senator, and we are going to do that here. I would like
    them to show up so I could fight them in person right here in
    this hearing because that is what has got to happen. If we are
    going to move anything, as Lindsey Graham says, if we are going
    to have anything really happen, we have got to have people
    speaking out.
        Thank you, ma'am, for making it known that this is
    happening under our noses. Stranger danger doesn't work
    anymore. Don't get into the van doesn't work anymore. It is
    happening in our kids' bedrooms, and we need to be vocal about
    it and say, if they are not your friend in real life, they
    can't be your friend online. Let's get that message out, and I
    appreciate you speaking out. And I hope other kids will not be
    embarrassed enough to share this with their friends, and we are
    going to work on that. Please come to my office so we can come
    up with a plan.
        I will say as a former Federal prosecutor, having a
    specific crime, outlawing and providing penalties for
    sextortion as a prosecutor, I know that would have been
    helpful. I appreciate you, Ms. Smolar. Have you seen a specific
    piece of legislation yet presented on outlining the elements of
    sextortion federally and what criminal penalty would be tied to
    that?
        Ms. Smolar. Other than proposed legislation----
        Senator Moody. Have you seen it filed, a piece of proposed
    legislation?
        Ms. Smolar. Not yet.
        Senator Moody. So we need to get that done.
        As a former Federal prosecutor, one to another, I will
    pledge to you we will make that happen. We also need to see
    that in the States. Do you think that would be helpful in the
    States?
        Ms. Smolar. Absolutely.
        Senator Moody. To see a specific sextortion crime defined
    with penalties attached in the States.
        Ms. Smolar. We work with States all the time on these
    cases----
        Senator Moody. As a former Florida attorney general, I
    created a cyber unit that worked specifically on these crimes
    that was incredibly helpful. They could go out, immediately
    recover evidence, begin work on investigations. Do you think
    having those specialty units in each State working with Federal
    partners would be helpful?
        Ms. Smolar. Absolutely. We do that all the time on these
    type of cases. In addition, a lot of the defendants, some--the
    perpetrators of some of these crimes are juveniles. And the
    States can prosecute juveniles and place juveniles. The Federal
    Government, it's much harder to do that.
        Senator Moody. Well, I have run out of time, but let me
    just again say thank you for not losing focus. Thank you for
    not losing passion on behalf of the kids of this Nation. They
    are going to be the ones that carry this message to their
    peers, and we need to continue pushing this message until it
    seeps into their vocabulary and this is commonplace for them to
    talk through these things.
        Thank you so much.
        Chairman Grassley. Senator Blumenthal.
        Senator Blumenthal. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you to
    all of you for being here today. And I know about the work that
    you have done and deeply respect your advocacy and your
    steadfastness on behalf of this cause, and also my colleagues
    for their passion and eloquence.
        But it is really pretty simple so far as Federal
    legislation is concerned. What we need is votes. You know, we
    need votes. We voted on the Kids Online Safety
        Act in the U.S. Senate and passed it by a margin of 91 to 3
    in the last session. And I would invite my colleagues to speak
    as passionately to the House leadership, which failed last
    session to give the Kids Online Safety Act a vote, not a vote.
    And this session, we have more than 60 cosponsors again in the
    U.S. Senate for the Kids Online Safety Act, and we undoubtedly
    will for other measures as well. But Big Tech is exercising its
    sway using its armies of lawyers and lobbyists.
        You have spoken powerfully today. My colleagues are on the
    right side of this issue. No one is in favor of child
    exploitation. But the fact is, Ms. Woods, as you wrote in your
    remarks about abuse and exploitation of your son, ``No system
    protected him, no platform stopped it.'' And I have met
    countless parents who feel the same way. The common factor in
    all their stories is the one gatekeeper that makes this abuse
    possible is, in fact, Big Tech. It is Meta and others who are
    allowing predators from around the world to use their platforms
    and make our kids prey to exploiters who are sometimes beyond
    our borders.
        So I guess I would invite you, Ms. Woods, and perhaps
    others, to talk directly to Speaker Johnson in the House of
    Representatives and tell him what you think he should do.
        Ms. Woods. You have my commitment on that.
        Senator Blumenthal. And perhaps others of you, witnesses,
    maybe you can tell me what impact or influence you can have in
    the House of Representatives. Have you been asked to testify at
    a hearing there?
        Ms. Smolar. I have not.
        Ms. Coffren. Certainly, we would love to work together to
    be able to get legislation passed. We see so many bills coming
    forward. We've seen the success of bills like the REPORT Act,
    like the TAKE IT DOWN Act, when they're nuanced, when they are
    focused, and when they can be introduced and passed very
    quickly, we have been able to see huge success in that. The
    REPORT Act is a great example. We saw increases in the amount
    and types of both child sex trafficking and online enticement
    that came. When we see those acts passed, we see progress, we
    see movement because we're holding companies accountable. If we
    don't, the rest of that reporting is voluntary. Those two
    reporting requirements were permitted to be received prior to
    them, and we certainly know that the prevalence didn't
    increase, just the responsibility to report.
        Senator Blumenthal. And I just want to close by saying, you
    know, we want a bill, we want a law. We don't just want
    speeches, but we want a bill that is effective. And right now,
    the House has weakened the Kids Online Safety Act bill, in
    effect decimating the duty of care, which prevents the kinds of
    abuses and holds the platforms accountable. It imposes a legal
    responsibility on Big Tech when it knows or should know about
    exactly the harms that you have come here to highlight.
    Decimating that duty of care is a disservice to all the parents
    and all the children who have become victims. And when you talk
    to Members of the House, I would urge you to insist on real
    protection for kids.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Grassley. Thank you. Senator Britt.
        Senator Britt. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        I really appreciate you all being here today.
        Mrs. Woods, thank you for continuing to tell your story.
    Thank you for continuing to honor James, to make sure that we
    all learn as parents. I have said this quite frequently, as
    parents, we are all just doing the best we can. And I am
    grateful to my colleagues on both sides of the aisle who have
    come together, you know, not as Democrats or Republicans, but
    as concerned parents and grandparents, knowing that what we are
    facing right now is just beyond comprehension.
        As a mom, you know, you work so diligently to keep your
    children safe. And used to, you would get them home at night,
    and you would lock the doors and you would be able to kind of
    exhale. And now the enemy is inside our home. The people who
    want to do our children harm are in the palm of their hand. And
    if we can't do this as Congress, I mean, what are we here for?
    We are here to protect the most vulnerable. We are here to
    protect our greatest asset. And to me, that is the next
    generation. And so thank you for continuing to raise your voice
    and ensure that you push this body to do what it needs to.
        I would love to know from your perspective, you know, Mrs.
    Woods, in particular, in your written testimony, you said large
    corporations continue to argue for rights while refusing to
    actually take responsibility. I think that sums it up. Tell me
    what you want us to know as we continue to push these various
    pieces of legislation to the floor. I am a proud cosponsor of
    probably every single one of them. And to your point, we are
    looking for, you know, how do we get something through? You
    know, I think we heard Ms. Coffren say, the faster we get it
    done, the more narrowly tailored it is, the greater chance for
    success.
        But we know we need sweeping and overarching reform because
    Big Tech is always going to care about one thing, and that is
    their profits. And we know they know what they are doing. I
    mean, I think it was just said in Reuters that Big Tech has
    said--Meta said about $16 billion of their actual profits are
    really directly related to scams and to ads on banned goods. It
    is insane.
        So tell me from your perspective what you think we need to
    do. What are the simple fixes that would ultimately have been
    able to save your son's life?
        Ms. Woods. Well, one, I definitely think education and for
    us to pass the education law. I'm really, really big on
    education. That's----
        Senator Britt. Ms. Woods, I love that you said that because
    every school group that I get a chance to talk to, I say, hold
    on, here is my mom moment, and then we go directly into the
    things that you are talking about, so education, one.
        Ms. Woods. Education is No. 1 because the crime will never
    go away. Even if we set laws, we still have to educate our
    kids, our community to make sure that we know when this
    happens, we can fight against it.
        But two, I guess I'm coming from a mom in a naive stance. I
    don't understand why it's so hard to pass laws.
        Senator Britt. Amen.
        Ms. Woods. Why--the money will always be there. I mean, we
    have people wasting money every day on all kinds of things. Why
    can we not take our children off of the marketing factor, the
    prey? I just don't understand how hard that is to take--to
    protect our children. We won't have a world without them.
        Senator Britt. That is right. And thank you for what you
    are doing and pursuing the litigation and saying, no, we need
    age verification. We need these guardrails to protect our kids.
    And the fact that they continue to prey, and that is exactly
    what social media companies are doing, are preying on our
    children because they know having our kids on their platform is
    how they make more money. And they are unwilling to do the
    right thing and help us ensure that these kids are protected.
    And it is moms like you, it is people like you, that are
    stepping up and saying, we must do more, that will ultimately
    force people in this body, force people in the House to
    actually do the right thing, so thank you.
        Ms. Woods. Yes. You're very welcome.
        Senator Britt. It should be simple. And this is common
    sense.
        Ms. Woods. Yes.
        Senator Britt. I would love in my remaining minute here--I
    would love, Mrs. Coffren, for you to tell me--I know NCMEC
    works closely with many of the social media companies to
    address this issue, but you also face challenges. And what are
    some of the biggest challenges facing NCMEC both from
    technology and actually, you know, the criminality continuing
    to evolve?
        Ms. Coffren. Thank you. Thank you so much for that
    question. Both quality and volume are our biggest challenges.
    It is not enough for a company to make massive reports that are
    not of good quality that law enforcement can investigate, nor
    is it appropriate for companies to look the other way and say,
    if I don't have actual knowledge of what's going on, I'll make
    no reports.
        We need to be--have diligent, robust reporting, especially
    seen in the legislation for the STOP CSAM Act. That would
    require companies to provide detailed reporting that would make
    these reports far more actionable. Right now, a company is only
    required to report two fields, the date and time, as well as
    what type of thing they're reporting. But if they don't provide
    the valuable information to get that report to the appropriate
    law enforcement so they can investigate, the report is
    effectively worthless.
        Senator Britt. Thank you. And Mr. Chairman, if you will
    allow me, Ms. Smolar, do you have anything to add to that,
    anything you would like to make sure that we know or that you
    see in law?
        Ms. Smolar. We could use these statutes. We could use the
    additional tools to prosecute these crimes. Our law enforcement
    agencies could use the resources to have agents being able to
    spend the time.
        With regard to sextortion, for example, you now have two
    different types of offenders. You have the traditional offender
    seeking sexual content, but now you have financial scammers who
    used to go after the elderly or romance scams. Now, they're
    targeting our children, and that is a lot for our law
    enforcement agents to be able to put their arms around and to
    be able to handle.
        Senator Britt. Well, I commit to you to working on this,
    and let's get something done.
        Chairman Grassley. I thank all of you for your testimony
    today. Your work for today is done, but I am going to announce
    that usually Members submit questions for answer in writing.
    Our Members on this Committee have until December 16 at 5 p.m.
    to submit questions for answer in writing. And I would ask each
    of you to answer and return the questions to the Committees as
    soon as possible.
        Thank you very much. Meeting adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 12 p.m., the hearing was adjourned.]
        [Additional material submitted for the record follows.]

    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

                                A P P E N D I X

    The following submissions are available at:

      https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/CHRG-119shrg62972/pdf/CHRG-
        119shrg
        62972-add1.pdf

    Submitted by Chairman Grassley:

     Grueser, Dana, letter............................................     2

     Montgomery, Brian and Courtney, letter...........................     7

     Tricia, Levi's Mother, letter....................................     4

     Zimmer, Amanda, letter...........................................     9

                                     [all]