IV

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. RES. 281

Respecting child pornography.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 20, 1993

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey (for himself, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. MCMILLAN, Mr.

PARKER, Mr. HYDE, Mr. SOLOMON, Mr. BARRETT of Nebraska, Mr.

DELAY, Mr. FIELDS of Texas, Mr. BUYER, Mr. CANADY, Mr. WOLF, Mr.

HUTCHINSON, Mr. RAHALL, Mr. DICKEY, Mr. GILCHREST, Mr. HEFLEY,

Mr. SENSENBRENNER, Mr. PORTER, Mr. BACHUS of Alabama, Mr.

LINDER, Mr. HOEKSTRA, Mr. LEWIS of Florida, Mr. BAKER of California, Mr. COX, Mr. RAVENEL, Mr. DORNAN, Mr. ROYCE, Mr. CAMP, Mr.

CUNNINGHAM, Mr. SUNDQUIST, Mr. BAKER of Louisiana, Mr. ROTH, Mr.

TALENT, Mr. HERGER, Mr. STUMP, Mr. BATEMAN, Mr. QUILLEN, Mr.

RIDGE, Mr. HANCOCK, Mr. SANTORUM, Mr. HORN, Mr. LIPINSKI, Mrs.

ROUKEMA, Mr. TAYLOR of North Carolina, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland,

Mr. CALLAHAN, Mr. SAXTON, Mr. HUTTO, Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA, Mr.

WALSH, Mr. INGLIS of South Carolina, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. ZELIFF, Mr.

GINGRICH, Mr. GEKAS, Mr. MCCOLLUM, and Mr. KYL) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

APRIL 14, 1994

Additional sponsors: Mr. STEARNS, Mr. GOSS, Mr. COLLINS of Georgia, Mr.

SMITH of Texas, Mrs. VUCANOVICH, Mr. RAMSTAD, Mr. COMBEST, Mr.

CRANE, Mr. GILLMOR, Mr. BLILEY, Mr. PAXON, Mr. KNOLLENBERG, Mr.

UPTON, Mr. EWING, Mr. ARMEY, Mr. POMBO, Mr. BUNNING, Mr.

MANZULLO, Mr. OXLEY, Mr. KING, Mr. MCCANDLESS, Mr. KIM, Mr. FAWELL, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. EMERSON, Mr. HOLDEN, Mr. PETE

GEREN of Texas, Mr. BARCIA of Michigan, Mr. LAZIO, Mr. GALLEGLY,

Mr. BILIRAKIS, Mr. LIGHTFOOT, Mr. KLUG, Mr. BLUTE, Mr. HANSEN,

Mr. MCKEON, Mr. SHAW, Ms. DUNN, Mr. MCDADE, Mr. BALLENGER,

Mr. MACHTLEY, Mr. BOEHNER, Mr. BURTON of Indiana, Mr. CALVERT,

Mr. CASTLE, Mr. WELDON, Mr. SKEEN, Mr. SMITH of Oregon, Mr.

SPENCE, Mr. TORKILDSEN, Mr. CRAPO, Ms. PRYCE of Ohio, Mr. SAM

JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. ARCHER, Mrs. BYRNE, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. JOHNSON of South Dakota, Mr. EVERETT, Mr. FISH, Mrs. FOWLER, Mr.

FRANKS of Connecticut, Mr. GALLO, Mr. MOORHEAD, Mr. PACKARD, Mr.

QUINN, Mr. KASICH, Mr. KINGSTON, Mr. LEVY, Mr. LEWIS of California,

Mr. KOLBE, Mr. LEACH, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. MONTGOMERY, Mr. COBLE,
2

•HRES 281 SC

Mrs. MEYERS of Kansas, Mr. BARTON of Texas, Mrs. JOHNSON of Connecticut, Mr. THOMAS of Wyoming, Mr. ROGERS, Ms. DANNER, Mr.

GENE GREEN of Texas, Mr. SARPALIUS, Mr. HASTERT, Mr. ZIMMER, Mr.

JOHNSTON of Florida, Mr. SCHIFF, Mr. DREIER, Mr. LIVINGSTON, Mr.

HALL of Texas, Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. SCHAEFER, Mr. WALKER, Mr.

GRAMS, Mr. BONILLA, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, Mr. MICA, Ms. MOLINARI,

Mr. MYERS of Indiana, Mr. KLINK, Mr. PETERSON of Minnesota, Mr.

BOEHLERT, Mr. STENHOLM, Mr. FINGERHUT, Mr. CRAMER, Mr.

MCCLOSKEY, Mr. HUFFINGTON, Mr. MCHUGH, Mr. GILMAN, Mr.

CONDIT, Mr. LANCASTER, Ms. CANTWELL, Mr. ROBERTS, Mr. ISTOOK,

Mr. POMEROY, Mr. HALL of Ohio, Mr. SHARP, Mr. TEJEDA, Mr. TAYLOR

of Mississippi, Mr. BARLOW, Mr. HOUGHTON, Mr. FROST, Mr. DUNCAN,

Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mrs. BENTLEY, Mr. GREENWOOD, Mr. MILLER of

Florida, Mr. PORTMAN, Mr. SHAYS, Mr. THOMAS of California, Mr.

FRANKS of New Jersey, Mr. PENNY, Mr. GUNDERSON, Mr. ORTIZ, Mr.

REGULA, Mr. TRAFICANT, Mr. PETERSON of Florida, Mr. NUSSLE, Mr.

HEFNER, Mr. MICHEL, Mr. GRANDY, Mr. MCINNIS, Mr. BEREUTER, Mr.

SKELTON, Mr. WHITTEN, Mr. MURTHA, Mr. VOLKMER, Mr. PETRI, Mr.

COOPER, Mr. YOUNG of Florida, Mr. HOKE, Mr. BORSKI, Mr. HOBSON,

Mr. TAUZIN, Mr. MCNULTY, Mr. MCCRERY, Mr. MURPHY, Mr. MOLLOHAN, Mr. GORDON, Mr. POSHARD, Mr. BACCHUS of Florida, Ms. LONG,

Mr. ALLARD, Mrs. MORELLA, Mr. SMITH of Michigan, Mr. DIAZBALART, Ms. KAPTUR, Mr. ANDREWS of New Jersey, Mr. COSTELLO,

Mr. SHUSTER, Ms. SNOWE, Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas, Mr.

CLINGER, Mr. LAFALCE, Mr. WILSON, Mr. GOODLING, Mr.

HOCHBRUECKNER, Mr. HAYES, Mr. DERRICK, Mr. KLECZKA, Mr. ROWLAND, Mr. EHLERS, Mr. SLATTERY, Mr. DARDEN, Mr. BAESLER, Ms.

LAMBERT, Mr. OBERSTAR, Mr. MANN, Mr. PRICE of North Carolina, Mr.

TORRICELLI, Mr. WHEAT, Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts, Mr. MANTON,

Mr. BARCA of Wisconsin, Mr. STUPAK, Mr. VALENTINE, Mr. HAMILTON,

Mr. INSLEE, Mr. BARRETT of Wisconsin, Mr. BREWSTER, Ms. SCHENK,

Mr. CLEMENT, Ms. SHEPHERD, Mr. DE LA GARZA, Mr. GLICKMAN, Mr.

STRICKLAND, Mr. SANGMEISTER, and Mr. BROWDER

RESOLUTION

Respecting child pornography.

Whereas child pornography is the permanent record of the

sexual abuse or exploitation of children;

Whereas children who are victims of child pornography often

suffer severe physical and emotional harm;

Whereas child pornography is a serious national problem;
3

•HRES 281 SC

Whereas the Congress of the United States has a compelling

interest in the protection of children from sexual abuse

and exploitation by pornography (see New York v. Ferber, 458 U.S. 747 (1982));

Whereas the Congress of the United States, in pursuit of this

compelling interest, has taken every opportunity to

strengthen child pornography laws and has, in clear and

unambiguous language, criminalized the production,

interstate distribution, receipt and possession of child

pornography;

Whereas the United States Department of Justice in its brief

to the United States Supreme Court in the case of Knox

v. United States, 92–1183, has failed to support the conviction of a child pornographer won by the Department

in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania and affirmed on appeal in the

United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit;

Whereas the Department of Justice has used its brief in the

Knox case as a vehicle for reinterpretation of the Federal

child pornography laws in contravention to legislative history and past prosecution practices of the Department of

Justice;

Whereas the Department of Justice by declaring in its brief

in the Knox case that a pornographer who lasciviously exhibits the genitals of children is prosecutable within the

Federal child pornography laws only if the depictions

show a minor engaged in the conduct of lasciviously exhibiting his or her genitals or pubic area, creates a federally protected class of child pornography, e.g. child pornography involving children who are not knowingly engaged in lasciviously exhibiting their genitals or pubic
4

•HRES 281 SC

areas but whose genitals or pubic areas are nonetheless

lasciviously depicted by others;

Whereas the Department of Justice by declaring in its brief

in the Knox case in contravention to legislative history,

that a pornographer who lasciviously exhibits the genital

or pubic area of children is prosecutable within the Federal child pornography laws only if the genitals are nude

or visible creates a federally protected class of child pornography, e.g. depictions which focus on a minor child’s

clothed genital or pubic area with the obvious intent of

eliciting a sexual response in pedophiles;

Whereas the plan meaning and congressional intent of the

language in section 2256 of title 18, United States Code,

is that the term ‘‘lascivious exhibition’’ refers to whether

the depiction is intended to elicit a sexual response from

the viewer, and not to the actions of the child;

Whereas the Department of Justice has employed this meaning of the term ‘‘lascivious exhibition’’ since it was included in the laws in 1984, and Congress has not

changed the meaning of the term;

Whereas Congress specifically repudiated a ‘‘nudity’’ requirement for child pornography statutes (see United States

v. Knox, 977 F. 2d 815, at 820–823, (3rd Cir., 1992));

Whereas the ‘‘harm Congress attempted to eradicate by enacting child pornography laws is present when a photographer unnaturally focuses on a minor child’s clothed

genital area with the obvious intent to produce an image

sexually arousing to pedophiles.’’ (see Knox at 822); and

Whereas the Congress of the United States believes that the

reinterpretation of the Federal child pornography laws by

Department of Justice, unless reversed, will bring back
5

•HRES 281 SC

commercial child pornography and lead to a substantial

increase of sexual exploitation of children: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that the Department of Justice repudiate its

3 reinterpretation of Federal child pornography laws, defend

4 the conviction won in lower courts in the Knox case, and

5 vigorously prosecute sexual exploitation of children.

Æ