On July 10, 2024, the U.S. Senate passed the Stopping Harmful Image Exploitation and Limiting Distribution (“SHIELD”) Act, which would criminalize the distribution of private sexually explicit or nude images online.  

Specifically, the legislation makes it unlawful to knowingly distribute a private intimate visual depiction of an individual that is obtained or created under circumstances in which the actor knew or reasonably should have known the individual depicted had a reasonable expectation of privacy, and where the distribution causes or is intended to cause harm to the individual depicted.  The bill would further criminalize the knowing distribution of a visual depiction of a nude minor with intent to abuse, humiliate, harass, or degrade the minor, or to arouse or gratify the sexual desire of any person.

There are exemptions from certain distributions of private intimate visual depictions from the legislation’s scope, including distributions that are made “reasonably” and “in good faith” to report unlawful or unsolicited activity or pursuant to a legal, professional, or other lawful obligation, among other exceptions.

Notably, the bill also provides that it does not apply to any provider of a “communications service” with regard to intimate visual depictions that are provided by another information content provider — i.e., a third party on the provider’s service — unless the provider of the communications service “intentionally solicits” or “knowingly and predominantly distributes” such content.  The bill defines a “communications service” to include, among other entities, providers of an “interactive computer service” within scope of Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act.

The bill passed the Senate by voice vote and now heads over to the House, where there is already companion legislation with notable bipartisan support (H.R. 3686).  Though legislation is difficult to pass when the House and the Senate are divided, the SHIELD Act has a serious chance of passage before the end of this Congress.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Nicholas Xenakis Nicholas Xenakis

Nick Xenakis draws on his Capitol Hill experience to provide regulatory and legislative advice to clients in a range of industries, including technology. He has particular expertise in matters involving the Judiciary Committees, such as intellectual property, antitrust, national security, immigration, and criminal…

Nick Xenakis draws on his Capitol Hill experience to provide regulatory and legislative advice to clients in a range of industries, including technology. He has particular expertise in matters involving the Judiciary Committees, such as intellectual property, antitrust, national security, immigration, and criminal justice.

Nick joined the firm’s Public Policy practice after serving most recently as Chief Counsel for Senator Dianne Feinstein (D-CA) and Staff Director of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Human Rights and the Law Subcommittee, where he was responsible for managing the subcommittee and Senator Feinstein’s Judiciary staff. He also advised the Senator on all nominations, legislation, and oversight matters before the committee.

Previously, Nick was the General Counsel for the Senate Judiciary Committee, where he managed committee staff and directed legislative and policy efforts on all issues in the Committee’s jurisdiction. He also participated in key judicial and Cabinet confirmations, including of an Attorney General and two Supreme Court Justices. Nick was also responsible for managing a broad range of committee equities in larger legislation, including appropriations, COVID-relief packages, and the National Defense Authorization Act.

Before his time on Capitol Hill, Nick served as an attorney with the Federal Public Defender’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia. There he represented indigent clients charged with misdemeanor, felony, and capital offenses in federal court throughout all stages of litigation, including trial and appeal. He also coordinated district-wide habeas litigation following the Supreme Court’s decision in Johnson v. United States (invalidating the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act).

Photo of Diana Lee Diana Lee

Diana Lee is an associate in the technology regulatory group. She counsels clients on a range of regulatory and litigation matters involving electronic surveillance, government demands for data, national security, and data privacy and cybersecurity issues, with a particular focus on cross-border and…

Diana Lee is an associate in the technology regulatory group. She counsels clients on a range of regulatory and litigation matters involving electronic surveillance, government demands for data, national security, and data privacy and cybersecurity issues, with a particular focus on cross-border and multi-jurisdictional concerns.

Before rejoining the firm, Diana clerked for the Honorable Victor A. Bolden on the U.S. District Court for the District of Connecticut.

Diana is a member of the Bars of New York and the District of Columbia.