Adopt the Parental Rights in Social Media Act, rename the Child Pornography Prevention Act, and prohibit conduct involving computer-generated child pornography

Brief

What this bill does

If it passes, what actually changes?

This is a criminal-law bill that rewrites Nebraska's child-exploitation statutes and attaches a new social media act. The Governor approved it May 20, 2025.

• Renames the Child Pornography Prevention Act as the Child Sexual Abuse Material Prevention Act, in section 28-1463.01.
• Defines "computer-generated" to include artificial intelligence, covering AI-made, morphed, or altered images (28-1463.02).
• Adds "receive" to the possession crime; a person 19 or older commits a Class IIA felony (28-813.01).
• Raises possession with intent to distribute by a person 19 or older from Class IIA to Class II felony (28-1463.05).
• Makes a second under-19 possession conviction a Class IV felony rather than a Class I misdemeanor.
• Adopts the Parental Rights in Social Media Act and outright repeals section 28-1463.04.

What it says it is for

Does it do what it claims?

For the criminal half, the title matches the operative sections closely. The social media half cannot be checked, because its sections are not in the text provided.

• Match: the rename to Child Sexual Abuse Material Prevention Act appears word for word in section 28-1463.01.
• Match: "prohibit receipt" shows up as new language inserted into subsections (1) and (2) of 28-813.01.
• Match: computer-generated and morphed depictions are reached through the new definitions in 28-1463.02(2) through (4).
• Match: "enhanced penalties" is real; a new "covered offense" list makes repeat convictions Class IC felonies.
• Match: "redefine terms" is real; "child" now means under eighteen for participants, under sixteen for portrayed observers.
• Unverifiable: no section of the Parental Rights in Social Media Act appears in the supplied text.

Where Scripture bears on it

What does the Bible say about this?

The bill asks how far the criminal law should reach in punishing the sexual exploitation of children — including images that no child was ever photographed for — and how much of that guardianship belongs to parents rather than the state. Scripture speaks to the gravity of sexual wrongdoing and to law as a good thing that meets an evil already present, but the connection is thematic rather than direct.

• "And if a man shall take his sister, his father's daughter, or his mother's daughter, and see her nakedness, and she see his nakedness; it is a wicked thing; and they shall be cut off in the sight of their people: he hath uncovered his sister's nakedness; he shall bear his iniquity." Leviticus 20:17
• "I find then a law, that, when I would do good, evil is present with me." Romans 7:21

These verses do not settle whether a computer-generated image with no real victim is the same offense as one made from a child, what felony class fits possession or receipt, when a second conviction should become a felony, or where a parent's control over a minor's social media ends.

---

Tri (turn 1): all three legs independently chose Romans 7:21 as the law verse. Grok (`grok-4.3`) paired it with Romans 7:23; Groq (`openai/gpt-oss-120b`) paired it with Matthew 10:35. I took Leviticus 20:17 instead — Matthew 10:35 and Luke 12:53 are retrieval artifacts, matched on "daughter in law"/"mother in law" containing the word "law," and say nothing about parental authority; Groq's pick would import family-division imagery the bill has no relation to. Romans 7:23 is about interior sin, which is weaker than Leviticus for a statute about exploitation. Both external legs returned `finish_reason: stop`; no failures.

The case each way

What is the strongest argument for, and against?

The disagreement is over whether broader definitions and stiffer penalties are proportionate to the harm.

• For: AI tools now generate realistic abuse imagery that the older visual-depiction language arguably did not reach.
• For: morphed images of a real, identifiable child cause harm regardless of how they were produced.
• For: the bill keeps affirmative defenses for teens who exchanged images of themselves voluntarily.
• Against: coverage of a wholly computer-generated person involves no real child, resting instead on obscenity.
• Against: "would appear to a reasonable person to be a child" is a jury judgment, not a bright line.
• Against: a second under-19 possession offense becomes a Class IV felony, pulling minors into felony sentencing.

What is unsettled

What should I be careful about?

This reading covers only the excerpt supplied, which cuts off partway through section 7.

• The Parental Rights in Social Media Act's actual duties, covered platforms, and enforcement are not in the text.
• The bill promises operative dates and severability, but the excerpt does not show either provision.
• No dollar figures, appropriations, or agency funding appear anywhere in the text provided.
• "Obscene" is set by cross-reference to section 28-807, which is not included here.
• Amendments to sections 29-4003, 29-4309, and 29-4316 are listed but their content is not shown.
• Whether narrowing "portrayed observer" to under sixteen reduces liability is not explained in the text.

Text (4)

• Enrollment And Review Er53 (application/pdf)
• Final Reading (application/pdf)
• Introduced (application/pdf)
• Slip Law (application/pdf)

Each link opens the Legislature's own document. The text itself is not in our database yet (fetched lazily); when it lands these pages will carry it verbatim.

All Actions (42)

Votes (10)

Every roll call as the Legislature recorded it, with each member's vote by name.

Sponsors (3)

• Sen. Dave Murman [District 38]
• Sen. Jason Prokop [District 27]
• Sen. Tanya Storer [District 43] — primary sponsor

Amendments (8)

Fiscal Notes & Statements (5)

• Committee Statement — Committee Statement
• Document — Enrollment and Review ST31 (recorded)
• Fiscal Note — Fiscal Note
• Document — Hunt MO159 (failed)
• Statement of Intent — Statement of Intent

The Legislature's own companion documents; each link opens the official copy.

Committees (1)

Related Bills (0)

No related bill information was received for LB383.