U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

1 

79–010 

" ! SENATE 115TH CONGRESS

2d Session 

REPORT

2018

115–199 

Calendar No. 292 

STOP ENABLING SEX TRAFFICKERS ACT OF 

2017 

R E P O R T 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND 

TRANSPORTATION 

ON

S. 1693 

JANUARY 10, 2018.—Ordered to be printed 


E:\Seals\Congress.#13
(II) 

SENATE COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

JOHN THUNE, South Dakota, Chairman 

ROGER F. WICKER, Mississippi BILL NELSON, Florida 

ROY BLUNT, Missouri MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

TED CRUZ, Texas AMY KLOBUCHAR, Minnesota 

DEB FISCHER, Nebraska RICHARD BLUMENTHAL, Connecticut 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

DAN SULLIVAN, Alaska EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts 

DEAN HELLER, Nevada CORY A. BOOKER, New Jersey 

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma TOM UDALL, New Mexico 

MIKE LEE, Utah GARY C. PETERS, Michigan 

RON JOHNSON, Wisconsin TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin 

SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West Virginia TAMMY DUCKWORTH, Illinois 

CORY GARDNER, Colorado MARGARET WOOD HASSAN, New Hampshire 

TODD C. YOUNG, Indiana CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada 

NICK ROSSI, Staff Director 

ADRIAN ARNAKIS, Deputy Staff Director 

JASON VAN BEEK, General Counsel 

KIM LIPSKY, Democratic Staff Director 

CHRISTOPHER DAY, Democratic Deputy Staff Director 

1 47 U.S.C. § 230. 

2Public Law 104–104, 110 Stat. 56, 133. 

Calendar No. 292 

115TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! SENATE 2d Session 115–199 

STOP ENABLING SEX TRAFFICKERS ACT OF 2017 

JANUARY 10, 2018.—Ordered to be printed 

Mr. THUNE, from the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation, submitted the following 

R E P O R T 

[To accompany S. 1693] 

[Including Cost Estimate of the Congressional Budget Office] 

The Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, to 

which was referred the bill (S. 1693) to amend the Communications 

Act of 1934 to clarify that section 230 of that Act does not prohibit 

the enforcement against providers and users of interactive computer services of Federal and State criminal and civil law relating 

to sex trafficking, having considered the same, reports favorably 

thereon with an amendment (in the nature of a substitute) and recommends that the bill (as amended) do pass. 

PURPOSE OF THE BILL

S. 1693 would amend Federal law to ensure that section 230 of 

the Communications Act of 1934 1 (section 230) does not prohibit 

the enforcement of Federal and State criminal and civil law relating to sex trafficking against providers and users of interactive 

computer services (ICSs). 

BACKGROUND AND NEEDS

The Communications Decency Act of 1996 (CDA), enacted as part 

of the Telecommunications Act of 1996,2 was the first bill signed 

into law seeking to regulate obscenity and indecency on the internet. It was an attempt to address, among other things, concerns 

about minors’ access to pornography and other indecent material 

2 

3 An ‘‘interactive computer service’’ is any information service, system, or access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including 

specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet and such systems operated 

or services offered by libraries or educational institutions. 47 U.S.C. § 230(f)(2). This term has 

been found to include, among other things, the following: websites (Carafano v. Metrosplash.com 

Inc., 207 F.Supp.2d 1055 (C.D. Cal. 2002), affirmed on other grounds, 339 F.3d 1119); website 

hosting services (Ricci v. Teamsters Union Local 456, 781 F.3d 25 (2d Cir. 2015)); search engines 

(Baldino’s Lock & Key Service, Inc. v. Google, Inc., 88 F.Supp.3d 543 (E.D. Va. 2015), affirmed 

624 Fed.Appx. 81, 2015 WL 7888322); and social networking sites (Klayman v. Zuckerberg, 753 

F.3d 1354 (D.C. Cir. 2014), certiorari denied 135 S.Ct. 680). 4See, e.g., Reno v. American Civil Liberties Union, 521 U.S. 844 (1997). 

5See, e.g., Letter from Faiz Shakir, National Political Director, American Civil Liberties 

Union, to Hon. John Thune, Chairman, United States Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation, Nov. 7, 2017, available at https://www.aclu.org/letter/aclu-letter-opposingsesta. 6See, e.g., Jane Doe No. 1 et al., v. BackPage.com, LLC, 817 F.3d 12 (1st Cir. 2016). 

online. Section 230 (as added by the CDA), the section central to 

the discussion around S. 1693, states that ‘‘no provider or user of 

an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or 

speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.’’ 3 This provision has had the practical effect of preventing ICSs from being held liable for the content that people who 

use their services create, unless a violation of Federal criminal law 

has occurred. 

Over the years, much of the CDA as originally enacted has been 

struck down in court on freedom of speech grounds,4 but section 

230 and its liability protections remain. Many have argued that 

this section provides an essential underpinning of the modern 

internet and is critical to the explosive growth of websites that facilitate user-generated content.5 At the same time, however, those 

protections have been held by courts to shield from civil liability 

and State criminal prosecution nefarious actors, such as the 

website BackPage.com, that are accused of knowingly facilitating 

sex trafficking.6 S. 1693 would eliminate section 230 as a defense 

for websites that knowingly facilitate sex trafficking. It would also 

empower State law enforcement to enforce criminal statutes 

against websites, and introduce new civil liabilities for violations of 

Federal criminal laws relating to sex trafficking. 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY

S. 1693 was introduced on August 1, 2017, by Senator Portman 

(for himself, Senator Blumenthal, and 23 other original cosponsors), and was referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation of the Senate. On September 19, 2017, the 

Committee held a legislative hearing on the bill. On November 8, 

2017, the Committee met in open Executive Session and, by voice 

vote, ordered S. 1693 reported favorably with an amendment (in 

the nature of a substitute). 

ESTIMATED COSTS

In accordance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the Congressional Budget 

Act of 1974, the Committee provides the following cost estimate, 

prepared by the Congressional Budget Office: 

S. 1693—Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act of 2017 

S. 1693 would aim to eliminate legal obstacles to the successful 

prosecution of people or entities that violate federal laws against 

3 

sex trafficking. As a result, the government might be able to pursue cases that it otherwise would not be able to prosecute. CBO expects that the bill would apply to a relatively small number of offenders, however, so any increase in costs for law enforcement, 

court proceedings, or prison operations would not be significant. 

Any such spending would be subject to the availability of appropriated funds. 

Because those prosecuted and convicted under S. 1693 could be 

subject to criminal fines, the federal government might collect additional fines under the bill. Criminal fines are recorded as revenues, 

deposited in the Crime Victims Fund, and later spent without further appropriation action. CBO expects that any additional revenues and associated direct spending would not be significant because the legislation would probably affect only a small number of 

cases. 

Because enacting the bill would affect direct spending and revenues, pay-as-you-go procedures apply. However, CBO estimates 

that any such effects would be insignificant in any year. 

CBO estimates that enacting S. 1693 would not increase net direct spending or on-budget deficits in any of the four consecutive 

10-year periods beginning in 2028. 

S. 1693 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act. 

The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Mark Grabowicz. The 

estimate was approved by H. Samuel Papenfuss, Deputy Assistant 

Director for Budget Analysis. 

REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT

Because S. 1693 does not create any new programs, the legislation will have no additional regulatory impact, and will result in 

no additional reporting requirements. The legislation will have no 

further effect on the number or types of individuals and businesses 

regulated, the economic impact of such regulation, the personal privacy of affected individuals, or the paperwork required from such 

individuals and businesses. 

CONGRESSIONALLY DIRECTED SPENDING

In compliance with paragraph 4(b) of rule XLIV of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, the Committee provides that no provisions 

contained in the bill, as reported, meet the definition of congressionally directed spending items under the rule. 

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Section. 1. Short title. 

This section would provide that the bill may be cited as the ‘‘Stop 

Enabling Sex Traffickers Act of 2017.’’ 

Section 2. Findings. 

This section would find the following: that section 230 was never 

intended to provide legal protection to websites that facilitate traffickers in advertising the sale of unlawful sex acts with sex trafficking victims; and that clarification of section 230 is warranted to 

4 

ensure that that section does not provide such protection to such 

websites. 

Section 3. Ensuring ability to enforce Federal and State criminal 

and civil law relating to sex trafficking. 

Section 3(a) would amend section 230(b) to declare that it is the 

policy of the United States to ensure vigorous enforcement of Federal criminal and civil law relating to sex trafficking. 

Section 3(a) would further amend section 230(e) to clarify that 

nothing in the section should be construed to impair or limit: (1) 

any claim in a civil action brought under section 1595 of title 18, 

United States Code, if the conduct underlying the claim constitutes 

a violation of the Federal sex trafficking statute (18 U.S.C. 1591); 

or (2) any charge in a criminal prosecution brought under State 

law if the conduct underlying the charge constitutes a violation of 

the Federal sex trafficking statute. 

The Committee notes that this Act would not abrogate section 

230(c)(2)(A). This provision would ensure that ICSs cannot be held 

liable on account of actions taken in good faith to restrict access to 

objectionable material. With this provision preserved, an ICS 

should not be concerned that it will face liability for knowingly assisting, supporting, or facilitating sex trafficking based on its actions to restrict access to material that violates the Federal sex 

trafficking statute. As section 230(c)(2)(A) provides, an ICS would 

not have their good faith efforts to restrict access to objectionable 

content used against them. 

If a plaintiff shows that an ICS is knowingly assisting, supporting, or facilitating sex trafficking, then the ICS cannot avoid liability by characterizing those actions as efforts to remove objectionable material. For example, if a website screens advertisements 

in an effort to remove objectionable material, but then merely edits 

illegal advertisements to make them more difficult for law enforcement to identify, or knowingly assists, supports, or facilitates sex 

trafficking, then even an ICS’s efforts to remove objectionable content are no bar to liability. Section 230(c)(2)(A) was never intended 

to, and does not, pose a barrier to liability on these facts. 

Section 3(b) would establish that the amendments made by this 

section would take effect on the date of enactment of this Act, and 

that the specific amendment to section 230 related to allowing 

State criminal prosecution or civil enforcement actions would apply 

regardless of when the alleged conduct occurred. 

Section 4. Ensuring Federal liability for publishing information designed to facilitate sex trafficking or otherwise facilitating sex 

trafficking. 

This section would amend the Federal sex trafficking statute to 

clarify that ‘‘participation in a venture’’ means ‘‘knowingly assisting, supporting, or facilitating a violation’’ of subsection (a)(1) of 

that statute. 

Section 5. Actions by State Attorneys General. 

This section would amend the Federal civil remedy statute for 

sex trafficking (18 U.S.C. 1595) to clarify that the attorney general 

of a State may, as parens patriae, bring a civil action against a violator of the Federal sex trafficking statute on behalf of the resiVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:54 Jan 11, 2018 Jkt 079010 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR199.XXX SR199
5 

dents of that State in an appropriate district court of the United 

States. 

Section 6. Savings clause. 

This section would establish that nothing in this Act or the 

amendments made by this Act is intended to limit: (1) any claim 

or cause of action under Federal law that was filed, or could have 

been filed, before the date of enactment of this Act; or (2) any claim 

or cause of action under State law, including statutory and common 

law, that was filed or could have been filed before the date of enactment of this Act, and that was not preempted by section 230. 

CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW

In compliance with paragraph 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing 

Rules of the Senate, changes in existing law made by the bill, as 

reported, are shown as follows (existing law proposed to be omitted 

is enclosed in black brackets, new material is printed in italic, existing law in which no change is proposed is shown in roman): 

TITLE 18. CRIMES AND CRIMINAL PROCEDURE 

PART I. CRIMES

CHAPTER 77. PEONAGE, SLAVERY, AND TRAFFICKING IN PERSONS

§ 1591. Sex trafficking of children or by force, fraud, or coercion 

(a) Whoever knowingly— 

(1) in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, or within 

the special maritime and territorial jurisdiction of the United 

States, recruits, entices, harbors, transports, provides, obtains, 

advertises, maintains, patronizes, or solicits by any means a 

person; or 

(2) benefits, financially or by receiving anything of value, 

from participation in a venture which has engaged in an act 

described in violation of paragraph (1), 

knowing, or, except where the act constituting the violation of 

paragraph (1) is advertising, in reckless disregard of the fact, 

that means of force, threats of force, fraud, coercion described 

in subsection (e)(2), or any combination of such means will be 

used to cause the person to engage in a commercial sex act, or 

that the person has not attained the age of 18 years and will 

be caused to engage in a commercial sex act, shall be punished 

as provided in subsection (b). 

(b) The punishment for an offense under subsection (a) is— 

(1) if the offense was effected by means of force, threats of 

force, fraud, or coercion described in subsection (e)(2), or by 

any combination of such means, or if the person recruited, enticed, harbored, transported, provided, obtained, advertised, 

patronized, or solicited had not attained the age of 14 years at 

the time of such offense, by a fine under this title and imprisonment for any term of years not less than 15 or for life; or 

(2) if the offense was not so effected, and the person recruited, enticed, harbored, transported, provided, obtained, advertised, patronized, or solicited had attained the age of 14 

years but had not attained the age of 18 years at the time of 

6 

such offense, by a fine under this title and imprisonment for 

not less than 10 years or for life. 

(c) In a prosecution under subsection (a)(1) in which the defendant had a reasonable opportunity to observe the person so recruited, enticed, harbored, transported, provided, obtained, maintained, patronized, or solicited, the Government need not prove 

that the defendant knew, or recklessly disregarded the fact, that 

the person had not attained the age of 18 years. 

(d) Whoever obstructs, attempts to obstruct, or in any way interferes with or prevents the enforcement of this section, shall be 

fined under this title, imprisoned for a term not to exceed 20 years, 

or both. 

(e) In this section: 

(1) The term ‘‘abuse or threatened abuse of law or legal process’’ means the use or threatened use of a law or legal process, 

whether administrative, civil, or criminal, in any manner or for 

any purpose for which the law was not designed, in order to 

exert pressure on another person to cause that person to take 

some action or refrain from taking some action. 

(2) The term ‘‘coercion’’ means— 

(A) threats of serious harm to or physical restraint 

against any person; 

(B) any scheme, plan, or pattern intended to cause a person to believe that failure to perform an act would result 

in serious harm to or physical restraint against any person; or 

(C) the abuse or threatened abuse of law or the legal 

process. 

(3) The term ‘‘commercial sex act’’ means any sex act, on account of which anything of value is given to or received by any 

person. 

(4) The term ‘‘participation in a venture’’ means knowingly 

assisting, supporting, or facilitating a violation of subsection 

(a)(1). 

ø(4)¿(5) The term ‘‘serious harm’’ means any harm, whether 

physical or nonphysical, including psychological, financial, or 

reputational harm, that is sufficiently serious, under all the 

surrounding circumstances, to compel a reasonable person of 

the same background and in the same circumstances to perform or to continue performing commercial sexual activity in 

order to avoid incurring that harm. 

ø(5)¿(6) The term ‘‘venture’’ means any group of two or more 

individuals associated in fact, whether or not a legal entity. 

§ 1595. Civil remedy 

(a) An individual who is a victim of a violation of this chapter 

may bring a civil action against the perpetrator (or whoever knowingly benefits, financially or by receiving anything of value from 

participation in a venture which that person knew or should have 

known has engaged in an act in violation of this chapter) in an appropriate district court of the United States and may recover damages and reasonable attorneys fees. 

(b) 

(1) Any civil action filed under øthis section¿ subsection (a) 

shall be stayed during the pendency of any criminal action 

7 

arising out of the same occurrence in which the claimant is the 

victim. 

(2) In this subsection, a ‘‘criminal action’’ includes investigation and prosecution and is pending until final adjudication in 

the trial court. 

(c) No action may be maintained under øthis section¿ subsection 

(a) unless it is commenced not later than the later of— 

(1) 10 years after the cause of action arose; or 

(2) 10 years after the victim reaches 18 years of age, if the 

victim was a minor at the time of the alleged offense. 

(d) In any case in which the attorney general of a State has reason to believe that an interest of the residents of that State has been 

or is threatened or adversely affected by any person who violates 

section 1591, the attorney general of the State, as parens patriae, 

may bring a civil action against such person on behalf of the residents of the State in an appropriate district court of the United 

States to obtain appropriate relief. 

COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934 

[47 U.S.C. 151 et seq.] 

SEC. 230. PROTECTION FOR PRIVATE BLOCKING AND SCREENING OF 

OFFENSIVE MATERIAL. 

[47 U.S.C. 230] 

(a) FINDINGS.—The Congress finds the following: 

(1) The rapidly developing array of Internet and other interactive computer services available to individual Americans represent an extraordinary advance in the availability of educational and informational resources to our citizens. 

(2) These services offer users a great degree of control over 

the information that they receive, as well as the potential for 

even greater control in the future as technology develops. 

(3) The Internet and other interactive computer services offer 

a forum for a true diversity of political discourse, unique opportunities for cultural development, and myriad avenues for intellectual activity. 

(4) The Internet and other interactive computer services 

have flourished, to the benefit of all Americans, with a minimum of government regulation. 

(5) Increasingly Americans are relying on interactive media 

for a variety of political, educational, cultural, and entertainment services. 

(b) POLICY.—It is the policy of the United States— 

(1) to promote the continued development of the Internet and 

other interactive computer services and other interactive 

media; 

(2) to preserve the vibrant and competitive free market that 

presently exists for the Internet and other interactive computer 

services, unfettered by Federal or State regulation; 

(3) to encourage the development of technologies which maximize user control over what information is received by individuals, families, and schools who use the Internet and other 

interactive computer services; 

(4) to remove disincentives for the development and utilization of blocking and filtering technologies that empower parVerDate Sep 11 2014 04:54 Jan 11, 2018 Jkt 079010 PO 00000 Frm 00009 Fmt 6659 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\SR199.XXX SR199
8 

ents to restrict their children’s access to objectionable or inappropriate online material; øand¿ 

(5) to ensure vigorous enforcement of Federal criminal laws 

to deter and punish trafficking in obscenity, stalking, and harassment by means of computerø.¿; and 

(6) to ensure vigorous enforcement of Federal criminal and 

civil law relating to sex trafficking. 

(c) PROTECTION FOR ‘‘GOOD SAMARITAN’’ BLOCKING AND SCREEN- ING OF OFFENSIVE MATERIAL.— (1) TREATMENT OF PUBLISHER OR SPEAKER.—No provider or 

user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the 

publisher or speaker of any information provided by another 

information content provider. 

(2) CIVIL LIABILITY.—No provider or user of an interactive 

computer service shall be held liable on account of— 

(A) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict 

access to or availability of material that the provider or 

user considers to be obscene, lewd, lascivious, filthy, excessively violent, harassing, or otherwise objectionable, 

whether or not such material is constitutionally protected; 

or 

(B) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or others the technical means 

to restrict access to material described in paragraph (1). 

(d) OBLIGATIONS OF INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SERVICE.—A provider of interactive computer service shall, at the time of entering 

an agreement with a customer for the provision of interactive computer service and in a manner deemed appropriate by the provider, 

notify such customer that parental control protections (such as 

computer hardware, software, or filtering services) are commercially available that may assist the customer in limiting access to 

material that is harmful to minors. Such notice shall identify, or 

provide the customer with access to information identifying, current providers of such protections. 

(e) EFFECT ON OTHER LAWS.— (1) NO EFFECT ON CRIMINAL LAW.—Nothing in this section 

shall be construed to impair the enforcement of section 223 or 

231 of this Act, chapter 71 (relating to obscenity) or 110 (relating to sexual exploitation of children) of title 18, United States 

Code, or any other Federal criminal statute. 

(2) NO EFFECT ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW.—Nothing in 

this section shall be construed to limit or expand any law pertaining to intellectual property. 

(3) STATE LAW.—Nothing in this section shall be construed to 

prevent any State from enforcing any State law that is consistent with this section. No cause of action may be brought 

and no liability may be imposed under any State or local law 

that is inconsistent with this section. 

(4) NO EFFECT ON COMMUNICATIONS PRIVACY LAW.—Nothing 

in this section shall be construed to limit the application of the 

Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 or any of the 

amendments made by such Act, or any similar State law. 

(5) NO EFFECT ON SEX TRAFFICKING LAW.—Nothing in this 

section (other than subsection (c)(2)(A)) shall be construed to 

impair or limit— 

9 

(A) any claim in a civil action brought under section 

1595 of title 18, United States Code, if the conduct underlying the claim constitutes a violation of section 1591 of 

that title; or 

(B) any charge in a criminal prosecution brought under 

State law if the conduct underlying the charge constitutes 

a violation of section 1591 of title 18, United States Code. 

(f) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this section: 

(1) INTERNET.—The term ‘‘Internet’’ means the international 

computer network of both Federal and non-Federal interoperable packet switched data networks. 

(2) INTERACTIVE COMPUTER SERVICE.—The term ‘‘interactive 

computer service’’ means any information service, system, or 

access software provider that provides or enables computer access by multiple users to a computer server, including specifically a service or system that provides access to the Internet 

and such systems operated or services offered by libraries or 

educational institutions. 

(3) INFORMATION CONTENT PROVIDER.—The term ‘‘information content provider’’ means any person or entity that is responsible, in whole or in part, for the creation or development 

of information provided through the Internet or any other 

interactive computer service. 

(4) ACCESS SOFTWARE PROVIDER.—The term ‘‘access software 

provider’’ means a provider of software (including client or 

server software), or enabling tools that do any one or more of 

the following: 

(A) filter, screen, allow, or disallow content; 

(B) pick, choose, analyze, or digest content; or 

(C) transmit, receive, display, forward, cache, search, 

subset, organize, reorganize, or translate content. 

Æ