WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

AB 1137

Reporting mechanism: child sexual abuse material.

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Ash Kalra and 4 co-sponsors

AB 1137 requires California social platforms to provide CSAM reporting, use hash-matching with human review, notify reporters, remove CSAM, and submit to audits and penalties.

In committee: Held under submission.
#reportingmechanism #childsexualabusematerial
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · AB 1137

AB 1137 — Reporting mechanism: child sexual abuse material (Krell)

Status and timeline
- Introduced: February 20, 2025.
- Committee actions: Referred to Privacy & Consumer Protection (P. & C.P.) and Judiciary; amended several times. Passed out of P. & C.P. and Judiciary (unanimous votes), re‑referred to Assembly Appropriations (suspense file).
- Current status (as of May 23, 2025): In committee — Held under submission.
- Fiscal notes: Fiscal committee review required; no state appropriation assigned in digest.

Purpose and intent
- Strengthen reporting, review, removal, transparency, and enforcement requirements for social media platforms with respect to child sexual abuse material (CSAM), and expand liability and public accountability measures to reduce the distribution and facilitation of CSAM online.

Key definitions (selected)
- “Child sexual abuse material” (CSAM): child pornography or obscene matter depicting a minor engaging in or simulating sexual conduct (consistent with federal and state definitions).
- “Depicted individual”: a person depicted (including via digitization or artificial intelligence) as a minor in CSAM on a social media platform.
- “Social media platform/company”: defined by cross-reference to Business & Professions Code 22675, but excludes 501(c)(3) nonprofits and end‑to‑end encrypted direct messaging services (or E2EE portions of multiservice platforms).

Major provisions
1. Reporting mechanism
- Requires platforms to provide a clear and conspicuous, reasonably accessible means for California resident users to report material they reasonably believe is CSAM hosted on the platform.
- Removes prior requirement that the reporting user be depicted in the material; instead emphasizes that the depicted person must be depicted as a minor.
- Platforms must collect contact information reasonably sufficient to contact the reporting user.

  1. Review process

    • Any report must be reviewed via a hash‑matching process where applicable.
    • If there is no established/known hash match to CSAM and the reported material is not otherwise blocked, the report must be reviewed by a natural person.

  2. Contact and notifications

    • Platforms must contact reporting users in writing (e.g., text or email) using a method chosen by the reporter that is not controlled by the platform.
    • Platforms must provide written confirmation of receipt within 36 hours of the initial report.

  3. Blocking and removal

    • Platforms must permanently block the reported instance if there is a reasonable basis to believe it is CSAM, it is hosted on the platform, and the report contains basic identifying information sufficient to locate it (platforms may not require a specific data element).
    • Platforms must make reasonable efforts to remove/block other instances of the same material.

  4. Audits and transparency

    • To avoid being deemed to have knowingly facilitated commercial sexual exploitation, platforms must submit to third‑party audits and publicly release audit reports (replacing an earlier internal-audit/board reporting approach).

  5. Enforcement and remedies

    • Extends existing private‑right remedies: platforms that fail to comply are liable for actual and statutory damages to reporting users (per existing law).
    • Adds a civil penalty that may be collected in civil actions brought by “certain public attorneys, including the Attorney General.”
    • Expands potential liability to “depicted individuals” for specified violations.

Other notes
- “Depicted individual” explicitly includes images generated or altered by digitization or artificial intelligence.
- Bill declares its provisions severable.
- Several provisions in the publicly available text are truncated; the summary reflects the principal, repeatedly stated elements in the bill digest and text excerpts (definitions, reporting/review/notification/removal, audit and enforcement changes).

Who is affected
- Primary: social media companies and platforms subject to California law (with exemptions noted for certain nonprofits and E2EE services).
- Secondary: California resident users who report CSAM; individuals depicted (including those depicted via AI/digitization); state enforcement officials (Attorney General and other public attorneys).

Potential impacts
- Increases operational requirements and public transparency obligations for platforms (reporting interfaces, hash‑matching systems, human review resources, third‑party audits).
- Creates additional legal exposure (civil penalties, liability to depicted individuals) and enforcement tools for state attorneys.
- Aims to speed acknowledgment and removal of CSAM while preserving human review where automated matching is unavailable.

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

Sign in to ask a question.