SJR 85 - This constitutional amendment, if approved by the voters, provides that no state law shall establish a right to distribute child pornography or engage in any criminal racketeering in violation of federal law. The General Assembly and any local government in this state shall have the power to outlaw and punish such offenses. Finally, any person may bring suit to enjoin another individual from violating federal law relating to child pornography or criminal racketeering. Courts shall award injunctive relief and reasonable attorney's fees to any prevailing party. This amendment is identical to SJR 26 (2025). TRISTAN BENSON, JR.

2026 Regular Session Introduced by Mary Elizabeth Coleman

SJR 85 creates Missouri state crimes for child sexual abuse material distribution and racketeering to parallel federal offenses and expand state prosecution authority.

Second Read and Referred S Judiciary and Civil and Criminal Jurisprudence Committee

Legislative bill overview

SJR 85 proposes to create new state-level provisions that address the distribution of child sexual abuse material (CSAM) and criminal racketeering offenses, specifically targeting violations of federal laws. The bill appears designed to strengthen Missouri's ability to prosecute and penalize these serious crimes at the state level, potentially creating parallel state offenses to existing federal crimes.

Why is this important

Child sexual abuse material distribution and racketeering are among the most serious criminal activities. Creating state-level offenses provides additional prosecutorial tools, ensures crimes can be pursued even if federal prosecution is unavailable, and allows state courts to impose penalties that may complement federal sentencing. This affects law enforcement capabilities, victim protection, and the state's criminal justice response to organized exploitation.

Potential points of contention

Federalism concerns: Whether states should duplicate federal crimes or if this represents redundant legislation when federal authorities already handle these offenses

Constitutional limits: Potential questions about whether state CSAM laws adequately protect First Amendment interests while preventing abuse of overbroad definitions

Racketeering scope: Uncertainty about how "criminal racketeering" will be defined—whether it broadly captures organized crime or focuses narrowly on specific activities

Prosecutorial discretion: Concern about multiple jurisdictions pursuing the same conduct, potentially leading to duplicative charges or inconsistent application