SB 740, as engrossed and amended, is a child sexual abuse and child sexual exploitation bill that creates two named provisions: the “Cindy Clemishire Act” and “Trey’s Law.” It voids and makes unenforceable any settlement agreement term that has the purpose or effect of concealing the details of a claim involving child sexual abuse or child sexual exploitation, while still requiring that identifying information about victims remain confidential. The bill also applies this anti-secrecy rule retroactively to agreements entered into before, on, or after the effective date, with a narrow exception for certain preexisting disputes that have already been litigated and reduced to a final, non-appealable declaratory judgment.
The bill further amends Oklahoma’s mandatory reporting law for sexual assault by narrowing when health care professionals are excused from reporting. Under the amended language, providers are not required to report certain sexual assaults involving adults who are not incapacitated, or sexual conduct between minors disclosed in a medical history review without evidence of coercion, exploitation, threat, or intimidation. At the same time, the bill preserves a victim’s ability to request a report and requires providers to inform victims of that right, document the incident and injuries, refer victims to sexual assault services, and provide records to law enforcement upon request.
SB 740 also substantially revises Oklahoma’s criminal statute of limitations for sexual crimes against children and related offenses. It allows prosecutions for a broad list of child sexual abuse, exploitation, trafficking, and related offenses to be commenced at any time after the offense, or by the victim’s forty-fifth birthday, and extends the limitations period for certain offenses against adult victims to 20 years after discovery. The bill includes special rules allowing prosecution at any time when DNA evidence, a DNA-based identification, or a confession exists, and it makes these changes retroactive for offenses not already time-barred. It also adds a penalty for knowingly false claims under this subsection.
In addition, the bill amends the Mental Health Law’s definitions section, updating and expanding definitions related to mental illness, facilities, licensed mental health professionals, assisted outpatient treatment, telemedicine, recovery support, and urgent recovery clinics. These changes appear to be a separate title amendment included in the bill text, but the dominant policy focus of the engrossed amendment is child sexual abuse, reporting, and criminal limitations periods. The effective date in the amended bill is November 1, 2025, while the earlier Senate version referenced a 2026 effective date.
The overall sentiment reflected in the voting history is strongly supportive. The bill advanced 11-2 in the Senate Health & Human Services Committee, passed Senate third reading 36-10, and later passed House third reading unanimously 90-0. That pattern suggests broad bipartisan agreement on the bill’s core goals of preventing secrecy in child sexual abuse settlements and expanding the time available to prosecute these crimes. The main points of contention likely center on retroactive application to existing settlement agreements, the limits of mandatory reporting exceptions, and the expanded or reopened criminal exposure created by the statute-of-limitations changes.
SB 740 would create new Oklahoma law voiding settlement provisions that conceal child sexual abuse or child sexual exploitation claims, while preserving confidentiality for victim-identifying information. It would also amend Title 22’s mandatory reporting and criminal procedure provisions, changing when health care professionals must report sexual assault and extending or eliminating limitation periods for a wide range of child sexual abuse, exploitation, trafficking, and related offenses. The bill also revises Title 43A mental health definitions, updating terminology and treatment-related definitions used in the Mental Health and Substance Abuse Services statutes.
The bill appears to have been received very favorably overall. It cleared a Senate committee with a strong margin, passed Senate floor consideration with a solid majority, and later passed the House unanimously. The vote pattern indicates broad bipartisan support for the bill’s anti-secrecy and child-protection provisions, with little visible opposition by the time of House passage.
The most likely areas of disagreement are the bill’s retroactive invalidation of confidentiality provisions in prior settlement agreements, the scope of exceptions for health care reporting of sexual assault, and the expanded statute of limitations for prosecuting child sexual abuse and related offenses. Opponents or skeptics may view the retroactive settlement rule as interfering with private contracts or settled expectations, while supporters likely see it as necessary to prevent concealment of abuse. The statute-of-limitations changes may also raise concerns about due process, evidentiary reliability, and reopening old allegations, though the bill includes DNA and confession-based safeguards and a prohibition on prosecutions based solely on recovered repressed memory.