WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

HB 2183

Relating to certification of private security professionals.

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Jeff Helfrich and 1 co-sponsor

Expands Kansas law to criminalize AI-generated sexual imagery of minors and AI-modified images of identifiable people, and to broaden breach-of-privacy to such AI depictions.

Chapter 72, (2025 Laws): Effective date January 1, 2026.
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · HB 2183

Summary — HB 2183 (2025)

Status: Conference committee report available (conference report adopted March 27, 2025 — Yea 30, Nay 10)
Introduced: January 28, 2025 (requested by Rep. Barrett) — primary sponsor listed as Meza
Effective date (as reported in fiscal note): July 1, 2025

Purpose

HB 2183 updates Kansas criminal statutes to cover visual media created, altered or generated by artificial intelligence (AI) or other digital means. The bill seeks to (1) criminalize possession and transmission of sexually explicit AI-generated images that depict children (or appear to do so), and (2) expand breach-of-privacy offenses to cover dissemination of AI‑modified images that depict or purport to depict identifiable persons.

Key provisions

  • Expands the definitions of "visual depiction" and related offenses to include images, videos or other media that are created, altered or modified by AI or digital means.
  • Sexual exploitation of a child:
    • Adds possession of any "artificially generated visual depiction" that is obscene and appears to depict a child (<18) in sexually explicit conduct — when possessed with intent to arouse or satisfy sexual desires — as conduct that constitutes sexual exploitation.
    • Defines "artificially generated visual depiction" to include obscene depictions that are indistinguishable from a real child, morphed from a real child’s image, or generated without any actual child involvement.
    • Retains and applies existing penalties for sexual exploitation (ranges from severity level 5 person felony up to off-grid person felony depending on subsection and age).
  • Unlawful transmission of a visual depiction of a child:
    • Broadens the statutory "visual depiction" to include items created/altered by AI or digital means to appear to depict an identifiable child, regardless of whether an actual child was involved.
    • Retains existing penalty structure (Class A person misdemeanor up to felony on repeat/offender-age factors).
  • Breach of privacy:
    • Makes it a crime to disseminate videotapes, photographs, films or images created, altered or modified by AI to appear to depict or purport to depict an identifiable person — regardless of whether that person was involved in creating the original image.
    • Creates an exception: the breach‑of‑privacy prohibition does not apply to specified cable/satellite/multi-channel video programming providers as defined by federal law (per Senate amendment).
  • Retains existing statutory elements and penalties for related offenses; preserves the existing victim-possession exception where applicable (e.g., child who is the subject).

Who is affected

  • Individuals who create, possess, distribute or transmit AI- or digitally-generated images that depict or purport to depict minors in sexually explicit content, or identifiable persons in private states (per breach‑of‑privacy expansion).
  • Law enforcement, prosecutors, public defenders and courts (potentially increased caseloads and specialized investigation needs).
  • Cable/direct-to-home satellite/multi-channel video programming providers (explicit statutory exception).

Penalties and fiscal impact

  • Offenders face the same penalty ranges already assigned to the underlying offenses (misdemeanors up through person felonies and off-grid felonies for most serious categories).
  • Fiscal note (Division of the Budget / Board of Indigents’ Defense Services):
    • BIDS anticipates increased defense costs and possibly hiring 1.0 FTE attorney depending on new caseload.
    • Estimated SGF per-case defense cost: severity level 8–10 cases ~$2,918–$4,375; severity level 4–7 cases ~$4,752–$7,125 (based on hourly rates and estimated attorney hours).
    • Judicial Branch, Sentencing Commission, and Department of Corrections report potential increases in district court filings and prison admissions; exact fiscal magnitude is unknown.

Legislative history & debate

  • Introduced at the request of Rep. Barrett; heard in House Judiciary. Proponents (district attorneys, police chiefs/sheriffs associations) argued it is a tool to identify/stop child sexual abuse offenders and prevent harm. Opponent testimony (Board of Indigents’ Defense Services) raised First Amendment concerns about overly broad restrictions on expressive material.
  • Passed House as amended, amended in committee of the whole and Senate Committee on Judiciary; conference committee convened and report adopted March 27, 2025.

Notes / Considerations

  • The bill targets obscene AI‑generated depictions and depictions "indistinguishable" from real children, but implementing and proving "indistinguishable" or "identifiable" in court may involve technical and constitutional questions (e.g., free speech, proof of intent). The fiscal and operational impacts depend on enforcement patterns and litigation outcomes.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.