[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 158 (Tuesday, September 25, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H8839-H8844]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




               PREVENTING CHILD EXPLOITATION ACT OF 2018

  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill 
(H.R. 6847) to amend title 18, United States Code, to expand and 
strengthen Federal sex offenses, to reauthorize certain programs 
established by the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006, 
and for other purposes, as amended.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The text of the bill is as follows:

                               H.R. 6847

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.

       (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Preventing 
     Child Exploitation Act of 2018''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for this Act 
     is as follows:

Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.

            TITLE I--STRENGTHENING FEDERAL SEX OFFENSE LAWS

Sec. 101. Expanding the definition of illicit sexual conduct.
Sec. 102. Expanding the definition of Federal sex offense.
Sec. 103. Failure of sex offenders to register.
Sec. 104. Prior military offenses included for purposes of recidivist 
              sentencing provisions.
Sec. 105. Sexual exploitation of children.
Sec. 106. Limited liability for certain persons when responding to 
              search warrants or other legal process.

                TITLE II--ADAM WALSH REAUTHORIZATION ACT

Sec. 201. Short title.
Sec. 202. Sex offender management assistance (SOMA) program 
              reauthorization.
Sec. 203. Reauthorization of Federal assistance with respect to 
              violations of registration requirements.
Sec. 204. Duration of sex offender registration requirements for 
              certain juveniles.
Sec. 205. Public access to juvenile sex offender information.
Sec. 206. Protection of local governments from State noncompliance 
              penalty under SORNA.
Sec. 207. Additional information to be included in annual report on 
              enforcement of registration requirements.
Sec. 208. Ensuring supervision of released sexually dangerous persons.
Sec. 209. Tribal Access Program.
Sec. 210. Alternative mechanisms for in-person verification.
Sec. 211. Clarification of aggravated sexual abuse.
Sec. 212. Comprehensive examination of sex offender issues.
Sec. 213. Assisting States with juvenile registration.

            TITLE I--STRENGTHENING FEDERAL SEX OFFENSE LAWS

     SEC. 101. EXPANDING THE DEFINITION OF ILLICIT SEXUAL CONDUCT.

       Section 2423(f)(1) of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by striking ``a sexual act (as defined in section 2246) 
     with'' and inserting ``any conduct involving''; and
       (2) by striking ``if the sexual act'' and inserting ``if 
     the conduct''.

     SEC. 102. EXPANDING THE DEFINITION OF FEDERAL SEX OFFENSE.

       Section 3559 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (e)(2)(A)--
       (A) by inserting after ``2244(a)(1)'' the following ``or 
     2244(a)(5)'';
       (B) by striking the ``or'' before ``2423(a)'';
       (C) by striking ``into prostitution''; and
       (D) by inserting ``or 2423(c) (relating to illicit sexual 
     conduct)'' before the semicolon at the end; and
       (2) in subsection (e)(3), by striking ``or 2423(a)'' and 
     inserting ``, 2423(a), or 2423(c)''.

     SEC. 103. FAILURE OF SEX OFFENDERS TO REGISTER.

       Section 2250(d) of title 18, United State Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by inserting after ``Federal law (including the Uniform 
     Code of Military Justice),'' the following: ``State law,''; 
     and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(3) Definition.--In this section, the term `crime of 
     violence' has the meaning given such term in section 16.''.

     SEC. 104. PRIOR MILITARY OFFENSES INCLUDED FOR PURPOSES OF 
                   RECIDIVIST SENTENCING PROVISIONS.

       (a) Aggravated Sexual Abuse.--Section 2241(c) of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after ``State 
     offense'' the following: ``or an offense under the Uniform 
     Code of Military Justice''.
       (b) Sexual Exploitation of Children.--Section 2251(e) of 
     title 18, United States Code, is amended by striking 
     ``section 920 of title 10 (article 120 of the Uniform Code of 
     Military Justice), or under'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``the Uniform Code of Military Justice or''.
       (c) Certain Activities Relating to Material Involving the 
     Sexual Exploitation of Minors.--Section 2252 of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``section 920 of 
     title 10 (article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military 
     Justice), or under'' and inserting ``the Uniform Code of 
     Military Justice or''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ``section 920 of 
     title 10 (article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military 
     Justice), or under'' and inserting ``the Uniform Code of 
     Military Justice or''.
       (d) Certain Activities Relating to Material Constituting or 
     Containing Child Pornography.--Section 2252A of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``section 920 of 
     title 10 (article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military 
     Justice), or under'' and inserting ``the Uniform Code of 
     Military Justice or''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ``section 920 of 
     title 10 (article 120 of the Uniform Code of Military 
     Justice), or under'' and inserting ``the Uniform Code of 
     Military Justice or''.
       (e) Repeat Offenders.--Section 2426(b)(1)(B) of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after ``State 
     law'' the following: ``or the Uniform Code of Military 
     Justice''.
       (f) Sentencing Classification.--Section 3559 of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (e)(2)(B)--
       (A) by striking ``State sex offense'' and inserting ``State 
     or Military sex offense''; and
       (B) by inserting after ``under State law'' the following: 
     ``or the Uniform Code of Military Justice''; and
       (2) in subsection (e)(2)(C), by inserting after ``State'' 
     the following: ``or Military''.

     SEC. 105. SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF CHILDREN.

       Section 2251 of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) by amending subsections (a) and (b) to read as follows:
       ``(a) Any person who, in a circumstance described in 
     subsection (f), knowingly--
       ``(1) employs, uses, persuades, induces, entices, or 
     coerces a minor to engage in any sexually explicit conduct 
     for the purpose of producing any visual depiction of such 
     conduct, or transmitting a live visual depiction of such 
     conduct;
       ``(2) produces or causes to be produced a visual depiction 
     of a minor engaged in any sexually explicit conduct where the 
     production of such visual depiction involves the use of a 
     minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct and such visual 
     depiction is of such conduct;
       ``(3) transmits or causes to be transmitted a live visual 
     depiction of a minor engaged in any sexually explicit 
     conduct;
       ``(4) has a minor assist any other person to engage in any 
     sexually explicit conduct during the commission of an offense 
     set forth in paragraphs (1) through (3) of this subsection; 
     or
       ``(5) transports any minor in or affecting interstate or 
     foreign commerce with the intent that such minor be used in 
     the production or live transmission of a visual depiction of 
     a minor engaged in any sexually explicit conduct,

     shall be punished as provided under subsection (e).
       ``(b) Any parent, legal guardian, or person having custody 
     or control of a minor who, in a circumstance described in 
     subsection (f), knowingly permits such minor to engage in, or 
     to assist any other person to engage in, sexually explicit 
     conduct knowing that a visual depiction of such conduct will 
     be produced or transmitted shall be punished as provided 
     under subsection (e).'';
       (2) in subsection (c)--
       (A) in paragraph (1)--
       (i) by striking ``employs, uses, persuades, induces, 
     entices, or coerces any minor to engage in, or who has a 
     minor assist any other person to engage in, any sexually 
     explicit conduct'' and inserting ``engages in any conduct 
     described in paragraphs (1) through (5) of subsection (a)''; 
     and
       (ii) by striking ``, for the purpose of producing any 
     visual depiction of such conduct,'';
       (B) in paragraph (2)(A), by inserting after ``transported'' 
     the following: ``or transmitted''; and
       (C) in paragraph (2)(B), by inserting after ``transports'' 
     the following; ``or transmits'';
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(f) The circumstances referred to in subsections (a) and 
     (b) are--
       ``(1) that the person knows or has reason to know that such 
     visual depiction will be--
       ``(A) transported or transmitted using any means or 
     facility of interstate or foreign commerce;
       ``(B) transported or transmitted in or affecting interstate 
     or foreign commerce; or
       ``(C) mailed;
       ``(2) the visual depiction was produced or transmitted 
     using materials that have been

[[Page H8840]]

     mailed, or shipped or transported in or affecting interstate 
     or foreign commerce by any means, including by computer;
       ``(3) such visual depiction has actually been--
       ``(A) transported or transmitted using any means or 
     facility of interstate or foreign commerce;
       ``(B) transported or transmitted in or affecting interstate 
     or foreign commerce; or
       ``(C) mailed; or
       ``(4) any part of the offense occurred in a territory or 
     possession of the United States or within the special 
     maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
       ``(g) Notwithstanding any other provision of this section, 
     no criminal charge under subsection (a)(3) may be brought 
     against an electronic communication service provider or 
     remote computing service provider unless such provider has 
     intentionally transmitted or caused to be transmitted a 
     visual depiction with actual knowledge that such depiction is 
     of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct, nor may any 
     such criminal charge be brought if barred by the provisions 
     of section 2258B.''.

     SEC. 106. LIMITED LIABILITY FOR CERTAIN PERSONS WHEN 
                   RESPONDING TO SEARCH WARRANTS OR OTHER LEGAL 
                   PROCESS.

       Section 2258B of title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (a), by inserting ``from the response to 
     a search warrant or other legal process or'' before ``from 
     the performance''; and
       (2) in subsection (b)(2)(C), by inserting ``the response to 
     a search warrant or other legal process or to'' before ``the 
     performance of any responsibility''.

                TITLE II--ADAM WALSH REAUTHORIZATION ACT

     SEC. 201. SHORT TITLE.

       This title may be cited as the ``Adam Walsh Reauthorization 
     Act of 2018''.

     SEC. 202. SEX OFFENDER MANAGEMENT ASSISTANCE (SOMA) PROGRAM 
                   REAUTHORIZATION.

       Section 126(d) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and 
     Safety Act of 2006 (34 U.S.C. 20928(d)) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(d) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are 
     authorized to be appropriated to the Attorney General 
     $20,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 2018 through 2022, 
     to be available only for the SOMA program.''.

     SEC. 203. REAUTHORIZATION OF FEDERAL ASSISTANCE WITH RESPECT 
                   TO VIOLATIONS OF REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS.

       Section 142(b) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and 
     Safety Act of 2006 (34 U.S.C. 20941(b)) is amended to read as 
     follows:
       ``(b) For each of fiscal years 2018 through 2022, of 
     amounts made available to the United States Marshals Service, 
     not less than $60,000,000 shall be available to carry out 
     this section.''.

     SEC. 204. DURATION OF SEX OFFENDER REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS 
                   FOR CERTAIN JUVENILES.

       Subparagraph (B) of section 115(b)(2) of the Adam Walsh 
     Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 (34 U.S.C. 
     20915(b)(2)) is amended by striking ``25 years'' and 
     inserting ``15 years''.

     SEC. 205. PUBLIC ACCESS TO JUVENILE SEX OFFENDER INFORMATION.

       Section 118(c) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and 
     Safety Act of 2006 (34 U.S.C. 20920(c)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``and'' after the semicolon in paragraph 
     (3);
       (2) by redesignating paragraph (4) as paragraph (5); and
       (3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
       ``(4) any information about a sex offender for whom the 
     offense giving rise to the duty to register was an offense 
     for which the offender was adjudicated delinquent; and''.

     SEC. 206. PROTECTION OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS FROM STATE 
                   NONCOMPLIANCE PENALTY UNDER SORNA.

       Section 125 of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety 
     Act of 2006 (34 U.S.C. 20927(a)) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``jurisdiction'' each place it appears and 
     inserting ``State'';
       (2) in subsection (a)--
       (A) by striking ``subpart 1 of part E'' and inserting 
     ``section 505(c)''; and
       (B) by striking ``(42 U.S.C. 3750 et seq.)'' and inserting 
     ``(34 U.S.C. 10156(c))''; and
       (3) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(e) Calculation of Allocation to Units of Local 
     Government.--Notwithstanding the formula under section 505(c) 
     of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act 1968 (34 
     U.S.C. 10156(c)), a State which is subject to a reduction in 
     funding under subsection (a) shall--
       ``(1) calculate the amount to be made available to units of 
     local government by the State pursuant to the formula under 
     section 505(c) using the amount that would otherwise be 
     allocated to that State for that fiscal year under section 
     505(c) of that Act, and make such amount available to such 
     units of local government; and
       ``(2) retain for the purposes described in section 501 any 
     amount remaining after the allocation required by paragraph 
     (1).''.

     SEC. 207. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO BE INCLUDED IN ANNUAL 
                   REPORT ON ENFORCEMENT OF REGISTRATION 
                   REQUIREMENTS.

       Section 635 of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety 
     Act of 2006 (34 U.S.C. 20991) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``Not later than July 1 of each year'' and 
     inserting ``On January 1 of each year,'';
       (2) in paragraph (3), by inserting before the semicolon at 
     the end the following: ``, and an analysis of any common 
     reasons for noncompliance with such Act'';
       (3) in paragraph (4), by striking ``and'' at the end;
       (4) in paragraph (5), by striking the period at the end and 
     inserting a semicolon; and
       (5) by adding after paragraph (5) the following:
       ``(6) the number of sex offenders registered in the 
     National Sex Offender Registry;
       ``(7) the number of sex offenders registered in the 
     National Sex Offender Registry who--
       ``(A) are adults;
       ``(B) are juveniles; and
       ``(C) are adults, but who are required to register as a 
     result of conduct committed as a juvenile; and
       ``(8) to the extent such information is obtainable, of the 
     number of sex offenders registered in the National Sex 
     Offender Registry who are juveniles--
       ``(A) the percentage of such offenders who were adjudicated 
     delinquent; and
       ``(B) the percentage of such offenders who were prosecuted 
     as adults.''.

     SEC. 208. ENSURING SUPERVISION OF RELEASED SEXUALLY DANGEROUS 
                   PERSONS.

       (a) Probation Officers.--Section 3603 of title 18, United 
     States Code, is amended in paragraph (8)(A) by striking ``or 
     4246'' and inserting ``, 4246, or 4248''.
       (b) Pretrial Services Officers.--Section 3154 of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended in paragraph (12)(A) by 
     striking ``or 4246'' and inserting ``, 4246, or 4248''.

     SEC. 209. TRIBAL ACCESS PROGRAM.

       The Attorney General is authorized to provide technical 
     assistance, including equipment, to tribal governments for 
     the purpose of enabling such governments to access, enter 
     information into, and obtain information from, Federal 
     criminal information databases, as authorized under section 
     534(d) of title 28, United States Code. The Department of 
     Justice Working Capital Fund (established under section 527 
     of title 28, United States Code) may be reimbursed by 
     federally recognized tribes for technical assistance provided 
     pursuant to this section.

     SEC. 210. ALTERNATIVE MECHANISMS FOR IN-PERSON VERIFICATION.

       Section 116 of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety 
     Act of 2006 (34 U.S.C. 20918) is amended--
       (1) by striking ``A sex offender shall'' and inserting the 
     following:
       ``(a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), a 
     sex offender shall''; and
       (2) by adding at the end the following:
       ``(b) Alternative Verification Method.--A jurisdiction may 
     allow a sex offender to comply with the requirements under 
     subsection (a) by an alternative verification method approved 
     by the Attorney General, except that each offender shall 
     appear in person not less than one time per year. The 
     Attorney General shall approve an alternative verification 
     method described in this subsection prior to its 
     implementation by a jurisdiction in order to ensure that such 
     method provides for verification that is sufficient to ensure 
     the public safety.''.

     SEC. 211. CLARIFICATION OF AGGRAVATED SEXUAL ABUSE.

       Section 111(8) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and 
     Safety Act of 2006 (34 U.S.C. 20911(8)) is amended by 
     inserting ``subsection (a) or (b) of'' before ``section 2241 
     of title 18, United States Code''.

     SEC. 212. COMPREHENSIVE EXAMINATION OF SEX OFFENDER ISSUES.

       Section 634(c) of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and 
     Safety Act of 2006 is amended by adding at the end the 
     following:
       ``(3) Additional report.--Not later than 1 year after the 
     date of enactment of the Adam Walsh Reauthorization Act of 
     2018, the National Institute of Justice shall submit to 
     Congress a report on the public safety impact, recidivism, 
     and collateral consequences of long-term registration of 
     juvenile sex offenders, based on the information collected 
     for the study under subsection (a) and any other information 
     the National Institute of Justice determines necessary for 
     such report.''.

     SEC. 213. ASSISTING STATES WITH JUVENILE REGISTRATION.

       Section 125 of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety 
     Act of 2006 (34 U.S.C. 20927) is amended by adding at the end 
     the following:
       ``(e) Substantial Implementation for Juvenile Registration 
     Requirements.--
       ``(1) In general.--In the case of a jurisdiction that uses 
     a discretionary process for determining whether registration 
     under this Act is required for juveniles 14 years of age or 
     older who are adjudicated delinquent for sex offenses 
     described in section 111(8), the Attorney General, in 
     assessing whether the jurisdiction has substantially 
     implemented this title with respect to the registration of 
     such juveniles, may examine the policies and practices that 
     the jurisdiction has in place--
       ``(A) related to the prosecution as adults, of juveniles 
     who commit sex offenses described in section 111(8);
       ``(B) related to the registration under this Act of 
     juveniles adjudicated delinquent for such an offense; and
       ``(C) related to the identification, tracking, monitoring, 
     or managing of juveniles adjudicated delinquent for such 
     offenses who reside in the jurisdiction, including policies 
     and practices to ensure that the records of

[[Page H8841]]

     their identities and sex offenses are available as needed for 
     public safety purposes.
       ``(2) Submission by jurisdiction.--A jurisdiction described 
     in paragraph (1) shall submit to the Attorney General an 
     explanation for how the discretionary process used by the 
     jurisdiction with respect to the registration of juveniles 
     under this Act should be considered substantial 
     implementation of this title.
       ``(3) Determination.--The Attorney General may determine 
     that a jurisdiction has substantially implemented this title 
     if the Attorney General determines that the policies and 
     practices described in paragraph (1) have resulted or will 
     result in the registration, identification, tracking, 
     monitoring, or management of juveniles who commit sex 
     offenses described in section 111(8), and in the availability 
     of the identities and sex offenses of such juveniles as 
     needed for public safety purposes, in a manner that does not 
     substantially disserve the purposes of this title.''.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentlewoman from 
Alabama (Mrs. Roby) and the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) 
each will control 20 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Alabama.


                             General Leave

  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous materials on H.R. 6847, currently under 
consideration.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Alabama?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased we are voting today on the Preventing Child 
Exploitation Act, which rolls together four bills the House considered 
and passed last year but the Senate failed to take up and pass. Each of 
them will make important changes to Federal law to protect children.
  I would like to thank my colleagues--Mr. Ratcliffe, Mr. Johnson, and 
Mr. Sensenbrenner--for their excellent work in crafting and introducing 
these bills with me and their critical efforts to move them through the 
House earlier this Congress.
  The first part of H.R. 6847 is the bill I introduced, the ``Roby 
bill.'' It closes a significant loophole in pursuing offenders who 
engage in sex tourism and prey on children abroad. Specifically, the 
bill ensures that the definition of ``illicit sexual conduct'' includes 
all potential situations where an adult defendant may abuse a child 
under these circumstances. No longer will they be able to go and prey 
on foreign children without facing the possibility of significant 
punishment at home. They will also not be able to escape enhanced 
sentences for doing so.
  The bill also closes loopholes that permit those who sexually 
degrade, humiliate, and abuse children under 12 to avoid sentencing 
enhancements for repeat offenses.
  Congress always intended for children to have the greatest 
protections, and we must ensure that our laws reflect that intent.
  The next part of H.R. 6847, the ``Ratcliffe bill,'' closes yet 
another loophole regarding offenders who commit violent crimes while 
they are in noncompliant status as sex offenders. Currently, this 
enhancement applies only to those who committed crimes of violence 
under Federal, Tribal, D.C., or military law, and the law of any 
territory or possession of the United States.
  This bill adds State crimes of violence as predicate convictions, 
thus ensuring all sex offenders who have been convicted of crimes of 
violence face heightened punishment where they fail to register.
  Presently, certain recidivist provisions are not consistent with 
respect to conduct covered when someone has a prior sex conviction 
under Federal and State law, as opposed to military law. For instance, 
under current law, an offender with certain prior military child 
pornography convictions would not qualify for a sentencing enhancement 
that someone convicted under a Federal statute would, even if their 
conduct was the same. This bill fixes this and makes sure that those 
recidivist enhancements are applied consistently.
  The third part of H.R. 6847, the ``Johnson bill,'' fixes a judicially 
created loophole in the Federal production of child pornography 
statute. In United States versus Palomino-Coronado, the Fourth Circuit 
reversed a conviction for production of child pornography for 
insufficient evidence, allowing a defendant to walk free from 
production of child pornography charges despite photographic evidence 
he created that he had engaged in sexual abuse of a 7-year-old child.
  In doing so, the court suggested that a defendant must initiate 
sexually illicit conduct with the specific intent to create child 
pornography. This decision has extremely undesirable consequences in 
the prosecution of the production of child pornography. It has created 
a new defense whereby a defendant can merely deny a preformed, specific 
intent to record a sexual offense of a minor and escape Federal 
conviction.
  That is an outrageous result, and Congress' intervention is required 
to fix the statute. The creation of child pornography must be 
adequately deterred, and this fix ensures that it will be.
  Finally, H.R. 6847 includes the Adam Walsh Reauthorization Act, 
introduced by Crime Subcommittee Chairman Sensenbrenner, the author of 
the original Walsh Act. The bill reauthorizes the Sex Offender 
Management Assistance Program and provides funding for the United 
States Marshals Service, which is tasked with identifying and 
apprehending unregistered sex offenders. It also adds new provisions 
that aim to improve the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act 
and make it easier for States to comply.
  Thus far, 17 States, 108 Tribes, and 3 territories are in substantial 
compliance with the law. The intent of this bill is to ensure many more 
jurisdictions come into compliance.
  Over the past several years, DOJ has worked closely with the States 
to achieve this goal by promulgating flexible guidelines via the 
continued hard work of the Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, 
Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking, or the SMART 
Office.
  This bill takes several concrete steps to encourage compliance. For 
example, it addresses concerns many have addressed about juvenile 
offenders. It is important to keep in mind that only juveniles who have 
committed the most serious sex offenses are subject to registration 
under SORNA. Nevertheless, this bill lessens the amount of time a 
juvenile who commits certain offenses and keeps a clean record must be 
on the registry. If these youths keep a clean record for 15 years, they 
may petition to leave the registry.
  Additionally, the bill codifies 2016 DOJ guidelines which permit the 
SMART Office to deem a State in substantial compliance with the act 
even if it maintains a discretionary juvenile registry.
  Further, the bill alleviates the cost of implementation by explicitly 
permitting alternative means for in-person check-ins for registrants 
and lessening the number of required check-ins. This is a reasonable 
amendment that will help States with significant rural populations 
achieve compliance.

  I want to thank all my colleagues. I am glad to have had the 
opportunity to introduce the comprehensive child protection bill, 
which, as I have already noted, will strengthen Federal law to protect 
children. I also want to, again, thank Mr. Ratcliffe, Mr. Johnson, and 
Mr. Sensenbrenner for their work.
  There can be no keener revelation of a society's soul than the way in 
which it treats its children. I implore my colleagues to take that to 
heart and support this vital, well-crafted, commonsense legislation. I 
urge every person in this room to consider this bill, not just as a 
Member of Congress, but as a parent, a grandparent, an aunt, an uncle, 
or a friend. Please join me today in supporting this bill and 
protecting our children.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I am pleased to be on the floor with a fellow colleague 
in the Judiciary Committee, and we have a similar passion for children 
over the years.
  I am pleased to be able to acknowledge the work that the Walsh 
family, tragically, has had to do in honor of their son, Adam Walsh, 
and their reauthorization act, which has had a major impact on child 
violent crimes. So, in this set of bills is H.R. 1188, which I intend 
to speak on as it relates to protecting our children, but also are 
bills

[[Page H8842]]

H.R. 1761, H.R. 1842, and H.R. 1862, which we know would expand unjust 
mandatory minimum sentences.

                              {time}  1930

  So the Adam Walsh Act established the Sex Offender Registration 
Notification Act, often referred to as SORNA, as the national system 
for the registration of sex offenders.
  Everyone knows the tragic story of young Adam Walsh and the Walsh 
family that has committed themselves to years of fighting against 
violent sex offenders who have impacted our children. The Adam Walsh 
Reauthorization Act, however, that is included in H.R. 6847, reflects 
changes recommended to SORNA by the Judiciary Committee when it last 
reauthorized the Adam Walsh Act in 2012 to improve the requirements for 
States to register sex offenders. States that fail to substantially 
implement SORNA are subject to a 10 percent reduction in Federal grants 
under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant.
  Commendably, the reauthorization provisions that are included in this 
overall omnibus bill will allow States discretion in determining 
whether juvenile sex offender information will be publicly accessible 
via the internet, a step forward as it relates to comprehensive 
criminal justice reform addressing questions that recognize the 
difference for juveniles, and it would reduce the time that certain but 
not all juvenile sex offenders adjudicated as delinquent are required 
to register from 25 years to 15 years.
  I welcome these changes as steps in the right direction, which is 
what happens when we work in a bipartisan manner, to address some of 
the existing concerns with SORNA, which I supported as H.R. 1188 last 
year.
  Now, what has happened is that we have H.R. 6847 that incorporates a 
number of other bills with problematic provisions that would add new 
offenses to the criminal code requiring mandatory life imprisonment for 
certain repeat sex offenders.
  No one is coddling or condoning or supporting any of these heinous 
acts or individuals. Under section 3559(e) of title 18 of the U.S. 
Code, a defendant who has been previously convicted of a felony, 
Federal or State, sex offense committed against a child and who is 
guilty of a predicate Federal sex offense against a child must be 
sentenced to life imprisonment.
  H.R. 6847 would amend H.R. 3559 to add more Federal predicate 
offenses on which to base imposition of a life sentence, namely, sexual 
contact with a minor. Missing is the fact of not allowing judges to be 
involved in the sentencing of these particular offenses.
  This bill would also remove the requirement that a Federal predicate 
offense relating to coercion or enticement of a minor be related to 
prostitution. As a result, this bill would allow coercion or enticement 
of a minor into any criminal sexual activity to serve as a basis for 
imposition of a mandatory life sentence. Repeat offenders, of course, 
would be subject to increased penalties, and, for some offenses, life 
imprisonment is appropriate.
  Again, however, it is taking away the discretion of the judge in the 
review of these matters. Yet Congress should not mandate life 
imprisonment as the only sentencing option.
  Another set of problematic provisions within H.R. 6847, 
unfortunately, results in the expanded imposition of mandatory minimum 
sentencing, and so this leads many to be concerned and to be against.
  In another addition to the Federal crimes of violence already 
included in the statute providing penalties for failing to register as 
a sex offender, H.R. 6847 would add State crimes of violence as 
predicate offenses that, in turn, would require the imposition of a 
mandatory 5-year sentence to be served consecutively to any sentence 
imposed for failing to register or comply with sex offender 
registration, again, taking away the discretion of the court.
  The bill would also add prior military child sex offenses to several 
recidivist sentencing provisions, most of which carry mandatory minimum 
penalties of at least 15 years to life.
  Lastly, the bill would amend section 2251 to create two new offenses 
that prohibit causing the production of a visual depiction of a minor 
engaged in sexually explicit conduct and the transmission or causing 
the transmission of a live visual depiction of a minor engaged in 
sexually explicit conduct, such as live-streaming.
  In effect, these provisions would add a new class of offenders 
subject to mandatory minimum sentencing, specifically 15 to 30 years in 
prison. Yet this bill fails to provide any Romeo and Juliet exceptions. 
Consequently, the penalties apply even when conduct is consensual and 
when the victim and offender are close in age.
  For example, if a 19-year-old and 17-year-old videoed themselves 
engaged in a sexual act and email the video to their own email account, 
the 19-year-old would be subject to mandatory minimums set by section 
2251 as amended by this bill. That is why I offered an amendment when 
this issue was last heard before our committee.
  My amendment would have been the Romeo and Juliet, which would have 
simply amended the provision that defines which juvenile adjudications 
of delinquency qualify as offenses which trigger mandatory 
registration.
  As harsh as we need to be on these offenses, I am also concerned that 
we look to the reform of the juvenile system and not criminalize acts 
between juveniles. It would have added a new requirement that an 
adjudication for an otherwise qualifying offense would trigger the 
registration only if the judge presiding over the delinquency 
proceedings finds that the registration is necessary to protect the 
public safety based on a variety of factors.
  We all have the same common goal, and that common goal is to protect 
our children; but, unfortunately, there are children who are actors in 
this, and we want to allow the judge to discern what harsh penalties 
they should get. Frankly, my Romeo and Juliet amendment would have 
responded to two kids doing what kids sometimes do. Unfortunately, 
those provisions were not included.
  For far too long, the Federal criminal justice system has relied on 
an unsustainable system of mass incarceration that is largely driven by 
inflexible mandatory minimum sentences. Mandatory minimums are not 
necessary to impose appropriate sentences.

  The judge at sentencing has all the information he or she needs to 
impose a sentence commensurate with the crime committed and the 
culpability of the offender. Therefore, I note the issues that we have 
with a good bill and then the imposition of mandatory minimums.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from 
Virginia (Mr. Scott), the ranking member of the Committee on Education 
and the Workforce and former member of the House Judiciary Committee.
  Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6847. The legislation 
exposes additional persons to preexisting mandatory minimum sentences 
of 15, 25, 35, or even mandatory life in prison. While I support the 
underlying goal of punishing sex offenders and I agree that they should 
be punished harshly, I stand against mandatory minimums.
  For decades now, extensive research and evidence has demonstrated 
that mandatory minimums fail to reduce crime; they discriminate against 
minorities; they waste the taxpayer's money; and they often require a 
judge to impose sentences so bizarre that they violate common sense.
  Unfortunately, there are already too many mandatory minimums in the 
Federal code. If we ever expect to do anything about that problem and 
actually address this driver of mass incarceration, the first step we 
have to take is to stop passing or expanding mandatory minimums.
  The mandatory minimums in the code today did not get there all at 
once. They got there one at a time, each one part of a larger bill, 
which, on balance, would seem like a good idea.
  Giving lip service to the suggestion that you would have preferred 
that the mandatory minimum not be in the bill but then vote for the 
bill anyway not only creates the new mandatory minimum, but it also 
guarantees that those who support mandatory minimums would include them 
in the next

[[Page H8843]]

crime bill. Therefore, the only way to stop passing new mandatory 
minimums is to stop passing bills that contain or broaden the 
application of mandatory minimums.
  This bill is particularly appalling because it would impose mandatory 
minimum sentences on teenagers who are doing what many teenagers do. 
For example, teenage sexting is widespread, that is, texting sexually 
explicit pictures. Under this bill, teenagers who privately send photos 
of a sexual nature to each other may be prosecuted, and, if convicted, 
the judge must sentence them to at least 15 years in prison.
  The bill explicitly states that some of these mandatory minimums will 
apply equally to attempts or conspiracies. That means if a teenager 
attempts to obtain a photo of sexually explicit conduct by requesting 
it from his teenage girlfriend, the judge must sentence that teenager 
to at least 15 years for making that attempt. Or if a teenager 
encourages a friend to ask another classmate to send the sexually 
explicit image, the friend agrees to do so and asks her, they are both 
guilty of conspiracy and the judge must sentence both of them to at 
least 15 years in prison.
  Now, the term ``sexually explicit conduct'' actually includes 
simulated conduct. This means if a teenager asks another teenager for a 
photo simulating sex, then that minor, even if the minor is fully 
clothed, the law is violated. The teenager must get 15 years in prison.
  The bill does not allow the judge to consider the fact that the 
conduct may be consensual conduct between minors or consensual between 
a 17-year-old or an 18-year-old. These circumstances are irrelevant 
when the sentence is mandatory.
  In many cases covered by the bill, the draconian penalties are 
appropriate; in others, the penalties are just absurd. But because they 
are mandatory in the bill, they would have to be imposed anyway.
  This bill wouldn't be controversial if it did not expand mandatory 
minimum sentences, but, unfortunately, it does. I, therefore, urge my 
colleagues to oppose this legislation.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I continue to reserve the balance of my time
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Speaker, those who commit crimes against children--as I started 
out, I have been engaged in the tragedy of Adam Walsh from almost the 
very beginning and certainly support that legislation, but we realize 
that we must be very vigilant as relates to our children. There is no 
quarrel with that.
  There is a question of mandatory minimums and the importance of 
giving our courts that discretion. So those who commit crimes against 
children deserve to be punished, and repeat offenders most certainly 
deserve to face increased penalties.
  Nevertheless, there is a mass of us who have seen the results of 
mandatory minimums that result in mass incarceration. I oppose 
mandatory minimum sentencing and, therefore, this legislation. I 
believe that judges are best suited to determine just and appropriate 
punishment in these matters. It would have been more appropriate to 
separate out the Adam Walsh reauthorization legislation.
  Even conservative groups agree that expanding the imposition of 
mandatory minimum sentences is costly and unjust. Yet, without 
mandatory minimum sentences, individuals convicted of serious offenses 
would still receive appropriately lengthy sentences.
  Mr. Speaker, let me say that again. Yet, without mandatory minimum 
sentences, individuals convicted of serious offenses would still 
receive appropriately lengthy sentences.
  How can we underestimate the judgment of our Federal courts and 
others who see these cases and know the dastardliness of them? We 
should not create a one-size-fits-all policy approach.
  For the foregoing reasons, I would like to have these bills divided 
so that we can move on good bills and begin to work together for the 
appropriate way to punish, and punish strongly, but not build on the 
mountain of mass incarceration.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to H.R. 6847, the ``Preventing 
Child Exploitation Act of 2018,'' for several reasons.
  Regrettably, I must oppose this bill because, although it 
substantially includes the text of H.R. 1188, the ``Adam Walsh 
Reauthorization Act,'' which both the House Judiciary Committee and the 
House passed last year, H.R. 6847 also includes the text of three other 
bills, H.R. 1761, H.R. 1842, and H.R. 1862 that, although the House 
passed last year, would expand the scope of unjust mandatory minimum 
sentencing provisions.
  The Adam Walsh Act established the Sex Offender Registration and 
Notification Act--often referred to as ``SORNA''--as a national system 
for the registration of sex offenders.
  The Adam Walsh Reauthorization Act, as included in H.R. 6847, 
reflects changes recommended to SORNA by the Judiciary Committee when 
it last reauthorized the Adam Walsh Act in 2012 to improve the 
requirements for states to register sex offenders.
  States that fail to substantially implement SORNA are subject to a 
10% reduction in federal grants under the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice 
Assistance Grant Program.
  Commendably, the reauthorization provisions included in H.R. 6847 
would allow states discretion in determining whether juvenile sex 
offender information will be publicly accessible via the Internet.
  And, it would reduce the time that certain, but not all, juvenile sex 
offenders adjudicated as delinquent are required to register from 25 
years to 15 years.
  I welcome these changes as steps in the right direction to address 
some of the existing concerns with SORNA, which is why I supported H.R. 
1188 last year.
  Unfortunately, H.R. 6847 also incorporates a problematic provision 
that would add new offenses to the Criminal Code requiring mandatory 
life imprisonment for certain repeat sex offenders.
  Under Section 3559(e) of Title 18 of the U.S. Code, a defendant who 
has been previously convicted of a felony federal or state sex offense 
committed against a child--and who is guilty of a predicate federal sex 
offense against a child--must be sentenced to life in prison.
  H.R. 6847 would amend Section 3559 to add more federal predicate 
offenses on which to base imposition of a life sentence, namely sexual 
contact with a minor under the age of 12, aggravated sexual contact 
with minors between the ages of 12 and 15, and illicit sexual conduct 
with a minor abroad by a U.S. citizen.
  The bill would also remove the requirement that a federal predicate 
offense relating to coercion or enticement of a minor be related to 
prostitution.
  As a result, this bill would allow coercion or enticement of a minor 
into any criminal sexual activity to serve as a basis for imposition of 
a mandatory life sentence.
  Repeat offenders should, of course, be subject to increased 
penalties, and for some offenses life imprisonment is appropriate. Yet, 
Congress should not mandate life imprisonment as the only sentencing 
option.
  Another set of problematic provisions within H.R. 6847 unfortunately 
results in the expanded imposition of mandatory minimum sentences.
  In addition to the federal crimes of violence already included in the 
statute providing penalties for failing to register as a sex offender, 
H.R. 6847 would add state crimes of violence as predicate offenses 
that, in turn, would require the imposition of a mandatory 5-year 
prison sentence to be served consecutively to any sentence imposed for 
failing to register or comply with sex offender registration.
  And, the bill would also add prior military child sex offenses to 
several recidivist sentencing provisions, most of which carry mandatory 
minimum penalties of at least 15 years or life.
  Lastly, H.R. would amend section 2251 to create two new offenses that 
would prohibit causing the production of a visual depiction of a minor 
engaged in sexually explicit conduct; and the transmission, or causing 
the transmission of, a live visual depiction of a minor engaged in 
sexually explicit conduct, such as live streaming. In effect, these 
provisions would add new classes of offenders subject to mandatory 
minimum sentencing, specifically 15 to 30 years in prison. Yet, this 
bill fails to provide any ``Romeo and Juliet'' exceptions.
  Consequently, the penalties apply even when conduct is consensual and 
when the victim and offender are close in age. For example, if a 19-
year-old and a 17-year-old videoed themselves engaged in a sexual act, 
then emailed the video to their own email accounts, the 19-year-old 
would be subject to the mandatory minimums set by Section 2251, as 
amended by this bill.
  Unfortunately, the commendable provisions to reauthorize the Adam 
Walsh Act in H.R. 6847 are weighed down by the bill's inclusion of 
various problematic proposals that will expand mandatory minimum 
sentencing.
  For far too long, the federal criminal justice system has relied on 
an unsustainable system of mass-incarceration that is largely driven by 
inflexible mandatory minimum sentencing.
  Mandatory minimums are not necessary to impose appropriate sentences. 
The judge at

[[Page H8844]]

sentencing has all the information he or she needs to impose a sentence 
commensurate with the crime committed and the culpability of the 
offender.
  Therefore, I must oppose this bill and urge my colleagues to do the 
same.
  Those who commit crimes against children deserve to be punished and 
repeat offenders most certainly deserve to face increased penalties.
  Nevertheless, I oppose mandatory minimum sentencing and, therefore, I 
must oppose this legislation. I believe that judges are best suited to 
determine just and appropriate punishments in these matters.
  Even conservative groups agree that expanding the imposition of 
mandatory minimum sentences is costly and unjust. Yet, without 
mandatory minimum sentences, individuals convicted of serious offenses 
would still receive appropriately lengthy sentences, but we should not 
create a one-size-fits-all policy approach.
  For the foregoing reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose H.R. 6847.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume to 
close.
  Mr. Speaker, first, we need to make clear that this bill does not 
expand law to go after teenagers for sexting. Under present law, 
technically, such changes may be possible. However, we know of no 
instance where the Department of Justice has pursued such cases.
  When these bills were initially passed, the press falsely claimed 
that they would make it possible for DOJ to go after teen sexting. This 
is completely reckless journalism. Apparently, these journalists did 
not participate in any sort of fact checking, which would have merely 
consisted of opening a U.S. Criminal Code book. They also continually 
cite State cases as examples of Federal prosecutors acting 
aggressively, which is similarly extremely misleading. If our friends 
across the aisle would like to draw our attention to any cases where 
the Federal Government prosecuted consensual teen sexting, we would be 
happy to look at them.
  Last year, we offered to work on a provision to provide an 
affirmative defense in this chapter of the code, despite no evidence 
that it is necessary, but we were not taken up on our offer.

                              {time}  1945

  None of these bills, Mr. Speaker, create new mandatory minimum 
sentences. Instead, they modify the existing statutory framework to 
ensure the existing enhancements are applied equitably and to close 
certain loopholes.
  Some of the conduct covered is modestly expanded, but that is done 
commensurate with the crime. These recidivism enhancements are for 
these predatory crimes, especially where the defendant has previously 
sexually abused a child, which is the case for the enhancement in 18 
U.S.C. 3559(e).
  Society's laws need to address the problems of the day and protect 
the public, especially our children. Sex crimes against children are 
ubiquitous. Their number, as we heard in our child protection hearing 
last month, is growing.
  Additionally, the offenses are becoming more depraved, and the 
victims are getting younger. There is no sign of slowing down, and 
present law does not appear to be keeping up with the numbers.
  The gravity and growing prevalence of these crimes merit an 
appropriate societal response to have a proper deterrent effect. The 
enhancements provide this deterrent effect.
  In addition, these child sex crimes are vastly underreported. In 
these sexual exploitation crimes, the victims are often very young and 
very impressionable. They are often scarred for life as a result of 
horrific abuse. The punishment must fit the crime, especially where it 
involves our children.
  Again, my appeal to my colleagues is to consider this bill, not just 
as a Member of Congress, but, again, as a parent, a grandparent, an 
aunt, an uncle, and a friend. I urge my colleagues to adopt this bill.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the 
gentlewoman from Alabama (Mrs. Roby) that the House suspend the rules 
and pass the bill, H.R. 6847, as amended.
  The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the 
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________