Michigan House Bill HB4535

Michigan 2023-2024 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/9/23
• Refer: 5/9/23

Caption

Crimes: obscenity; electronic transmission of unsolicited and nonconsensual sexually explicit material; prohibit. Amends 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.1 - 750.568) by adding sec. 335b.

Impact

If enacted, HB4535 will directly influence how the law treats nonconsensual sharing of explicit materials within Michigan. It empowers recipients of unsolicited sexually explicit content to seek civil recourse, including injunctions, actual damages, and coverage of related attorney fees. This introduces a significant change in the legal framework, not only establishing criminal penalties but also providing a pathway for victims to pursue compensation in civil court. The dual approach of criminal and civil remedies is designed to address the impacts of such actions on individual victims and promote accountability among offenders.

Summary

House Bill 4535 proposes amendments to the 1931 Penal Code of Michigan by introducing Section 335b, which addresses the electronic transmission of sexually explicit material without consent. Specifically, it criminalizes the act of sending sexually explicit videos or images to individuals aged 18 or older when the recipient has not given consent or has explicitly forbidden such transmission. The bill categorizes such an offense as a misdemeanor, with penalties including a fine of up to $500. This legislation aims to provide clear legal reframing for the digital exchange of explicit content, reflecting contemporary concerns over privacy and consent in an increasingly digital world.

Contention

One potential point of contention in the discussions surrounding HB4535 could relate to definitions and interpretations of consent and what constitutes 'sexually explicit' material. Critics may raise concerns about the bill possibly infringing upon individual freedoms or rights pertaining to personal communications. Furthermore, the enforcement of such laws in the digital realm poses challenges, including the ability to prove knowledge and intent in the transmission of material. Stakeholders might debate the effectiveness of the measures intended to protect individuals while ensuring that the bounds of free expression are respected.