Bill
S 48
Expands MA CSAM law to clearly include AI-generated/digitized images that appear to depict minors, applying existing penalties to synthetic visuals.
An Act relative to AI‑generated child sexual abuse material — petitioned by Senator Michael O. Moore (Second Worcester); Senate Docket No. 678 (filed Jan. 14, 2025). Status: Introduced Jan. 9, 2025; referred to committees; DEFEATED IN JUDICIARY (May 12, 2025). Note: some metadata supplied with the request appears inconsistent (alternative title about budget votes and a federal sponsor list); this summary is based on the bill text included in the Massachusetts docket.
Purpose and intent
- To ensure Massachusetts’ criminal statutes that prohibit child sexual abuse material (CSAM) explicitly cover visual content that is created or altered via digitization or computer generation (commonly described as “AI‑generated” or synthetic images) where the resulting image would appear to depict a minor.
- Branded in the bill text as the “Stopping the Abuse, Victimization, and Exploitation of Girls Act” or the “SAVE Girls Act.”
Key provisions (section‑by‑section)
- Section 1: Amends G.L. c. 272, § 29C — inserts after the phrase “visual reproduction” the words “, including visual material produced by digitization.” This ties digitized/AI‑produced visual content explicitly to the statutory language governing visual reproductions.
- Section 2: Amends G.L. c. 272, § 31 (definitions) — adds a definition of “Digitization”: “the creation or alteration of visual material including, but not limited to, through the use of computer‑generated images, in a manner that would appear to a reasonable person to depict a minor.”
- Section 3: Further amends the statutory definition of “visual material” to explicitly include material “produced by digitization.”
What changes and who is affected
- Effectively expands the statutory scope of “visual material” and related offenses in chapter 272 to include AI‑generated or digitally altered images that appear to show minors.
- Affects:
- Content creators and users who generate, possess, or distribute synthetic images;
- Online platforms and intermediaries that host or moderate visual content (compliance and moderation responsibilities);
- Law enforcement and prosecutors (investigation, charging, and proof standards);
- Technology developers and companies that provide AI image tools.
- The bill focuses on definitions rather than specifying new penalties — it makes digitized/AI images subject to existing prohibitions and penalties applicable to CSAM under chapter 272.
Practical and legal considerations
- Enforcement would require assessing whether images “would appear to a reasonable person to depict a minor,” a statutory test introduced by the bill.
- The change addresses concerns about synthetic CSAM that involves no real child victim but produces images that appear to depict minors. This raises practical enforcement issues (detection, forensics) and potential constitutional or free‑speech questions that courts may examine.
- Cross‑jurisdictional and technology‑specific enforcement challenges are likely, given the internet distribution of such material.
Procedural timeline and outcome
- Introduced in the Senate (Jan. 9, 2025); docketed Jan. 14, 2025 (S.D. 678).
- Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary and to the Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity; Attorney General’s opinion requested.
- Notices of committee consideration and an initially scheduled hearing were recorded; a new draft was later filed as S.2633 (Oct. 16, 2025).
- The original S.48 was defeated in Judiciary on May 12, 2025.
Related measures
- Identified related or prior bills: SD 678 (replaces), S.8199, S.2029, S.4285 (prior sessions); companion A.5662 in the House; new draft S.2633 (later filing).
Bottom line
S.48 sought to broaden Massachusetts’ CSAM laws to explicitly capture AI‑generated or digitized images that appear to depict minors by amending statutory definitions. It did not create new categories of offenses but would have made synthetic images subject to existing child pornography prohibitions; the bill was defeated in Judiciary on May 12, 2025.
Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.
Sign in to ask a question.
