H0757 creates new criminal offenses and related civil remedies aimed at sexual images involving minors and nonconsensual altered sexual depictions of identifiable people. It adds a new section to the Florida Statutes prohibiting possession with intent to promote, and knowing solicitation, possession, control, or intentional viewing of, material that includes a “lewd or lascivious image.” The bill defines an “identifiable minor” and a “lewd or lascivious image,” and makes clear that multiple copies or multiple minors depicted can create separate offenses. It also expressly excludes material handled as part of a law enforcement investigation.
The bill also amends Florida’s child pornography statute to clarify how “actual or simulated lewd exhibition of the genitals” may be shown by the overall content of an image, using factors such as focal point, setting, pose, attire, and whether the image is intended to elicit a sexual response. In addition, it adds a prohibition on soliciting depictions that include child pornography, with criminal penalties attached.
A major part of the bill addresses deepfakes and other manipulated sexual imagery. It amends s. 836.13 to define “generate” and to prohibit willfully creating, soliciting, or maliciously promoting altered sexual depictions of an identifiable person without consent. The bill also creates a civil cause of action for aggrieved persons, allowing injunctive relief, damages of at least $10,000 or actual damages, and attorney fees and costs. It includes exemptions for internet service providers and certain law enforcement, reporting, and legal-proceeding activities.
The bill’s impact on state law is significant because it expands Florida’s criminal code to cover both child sexual imagery and nonconsensual altered sexual depictions, while also assigning these offenses severity rankings under the Criminal Punishment Code. It increases the tools available to prosecutors and victims, and it creates new liability for people who generate, solicit, possess, or promote prohibited material. The act takes effect October 1, 2025.
The overall sentiment around the bill appears strongly supportive and noncontroversial in the Legislature, as reflected by unanimous committee and floor votes in both chambers. There is no recorded opposition in the provided voting history, and no committee transcript excerpts indicating debate. The main policy tension inherent in the bill is between combating exploitation, child sexual abuse material, and deepfake abuse on one hand, and preserving exemptions for lawful reporting, investigations, and service providers on the other, but no specific contention is shown in the available record.
This act creates new criminal offenses in chapter 800 and expands chapter 836 to cover nonconsensual altered sexual depictions, while also amending chapter 827’s child pornography provisions and the Criminal Punishment Code severity chart in chapter 921. It broadens prosecutorial authority, establishes separate offenses for each item or depicted minor in certain circumstances, and adds a civil remedy for victims of altered sexual depictions. Affected parties include minors, identifiable persons depicted in altered sexual content, law enforcement, internet and communications service providers, and prosecutors handling child exploitation and image-based abuse cases.
The bill appears to have broad bipartisan support and little visible controversy in the legislative record provided. It passed the House Criminal Justice Subcommittee, House Judiciary Committee, House third reading, and Senate third reading with unanimous or near-unanimous votes, and there are no committee transcript excerpts showing opposition. The general tone suggests lawmakers viewed the measure as a response to child exploitation, image-based abuse, and AI-generated sexual deepfakes.
No specific objections are documented in the provided materials, but the bill’s most likely points of contention are its breadth and enforcement scope. The new offenses for knowingly soliciting, possessing, controlling, or intentionally viewing material that includes a lewd or lascivious image could raise concerns about overbreadth or proof issues, while the altered sexual depiction provisions may prompt questions about how consent, knowledge, and “reasonably should have known” standards will be applied. The bill addresses these concerns in part by carving out exemptions for law enforcement, reporting unlawful activity, legal proceedings, and certain service providers.