Wisconsin Senate Bill SB671

Wisconsin 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 11/20/25
• Refer: 11/20/25
• Report Pass: 2/3/26
• Failed: 3/23/26

Caption

An Act to amend 48.345 (3) (a) 2., 48.345 (3) (b) 2., 48.685 (1) (c) 2., 48.685 (4m) (b) 2., 48.685 (4m) (b) 2m., 50.065 (1) (e) 2., 51.20 (13) (ct) 2m., 103.34 (1) (b) 2., 111.335 (1m) (b) 1., 111.335 (1m) (d) 1., 165.84 (7) (ab) 1., 165.93 (1) (b), 301.046 (4) (b) (intro.), 301.048 (2) (bm) 1. a., 301.048 (4m) (b) (intro.), 301.45 (1d) (b), 302.05 (3) (a) 1., 302.105 (2) (intro.), 302.11 (1g) (a) 2., 302.116 (1) (a), 303.068 (4m) (b) (intro.), 304.06 (1) (d) 1., 304.06 (1) (em), 304.06 (2m) (a), 304.063 (2) (intro.), 343.06 (1) (i), 343.30 (2d), 440.312 (2), 440.982 (2), 767.461 (4), 901.08 (1) (b), 938.34 (3) (a) 2., 938.34 (3) (b) 2., 938.34 (15m) (bm), 939.615 (1) (b) 1., 939.62 (2m) (a) 1m. a., 939.62 (2m) (a) 2m. b., 939.632 (1) (e) 1., 939.74 (2) (c), 941.29 (1g) (a), 941.291 (1) (b), 948.13 (1) (a), 948.21 (1) (a), 949.03 (2), 968.28, 969.001 (3) (a), 969.08 (10) (b), 971.17 (1m) (b) 2m., 972.11 (2) (b) (intro.), 973.01 (3g), 973.0135 (1) (b) 2., 973.048 (2m), 973.176 (3), 973.20 (4m) and 980.01 (6) (a); to create 343.12 (7) (c) 18m., 786.36 (1m) (c) 16m. and 948.072 of the statutes; Relating to: creating a crime of grooming a child for sexual activity and providing a penalty.

Impact

The introduction of SB671 represents a significant shift in the state's approach to child protection laws. If enacted, it would add a new layer of legal consequences for individuals engaging in grooming behaviors, thereby strengthening the state’s ability to prosecute offenders. This bill also aligns with national trends towards more stringent laws aimed at combatting child abuse and exploitation, potentially setting precedent for future legislation that addresses similar issues.

Summary

SB671 is focused on creating a specific crime termed 'grooming a child for sexual activity' and includes provisions for penalizing those found guilty of this offense. The bill responds to growing concerns about the safety and protection of minors from exploitation and abuse, especially in digital environments where predatory behavior can manifest. By establishing a clear legal definition of grooming, supporters argue this bill helps to close gaps in current legislation that may not adequately categorize such predatory actions.

Conclusion

Ultimately, the debate surrounding SB671 reflects broader societal concerns regarding child safety and the responsibilities of adults towards minors. As discussions continue, it will be crucial for legislators to balance the need for protective measures with the rights of individuals to ensure that laws enacted are both effective and fair.

Contention

While proponents of SB671 highlight its potential to safeguard children more effectively, there are concerns raised regarding unintended consequences. Critics fear the bill could lead to overreach, where individuals might face severe penalties for behaviors that may not constitute actual intent to exploit. Additionally, some stakeholders argue that the existing laws may already cover similar offenses, and the introduction of this bill could create redundancies within the legal framework.