A Law Meant to Protect or Control?
- Karma Martinez
- Apr 9
- 3 min read
Edited and Co-written by Tristan Harr
On March 20th, 2025, the Texas legislature proposed Senate Bill 20, a law that would criminalize the possession, sharing, or creation of obscene visual materials depicting children—even if the images are fictional, AI-generated, or animated. If passed, the bill will go into effect in September 2025, and unlike previous attempts, this version comes with harsher consequences: felony charges.
At first glance, the bill seems like a step in the right direction for protecting children, especially in a digital age where harmful content spreads fast. But a closer look reveals that the bill may be far too vague, opening the door for potential censorship and over-policing of digital media.
Senate Bill 20 amends the Texas Penal Code to create a new offense. It says:
“A person commits an offense if the person knowingly possesses, accesses with intent to view, or promotes obscene visual material containing a depiction that appears to be of a child younger than 18 years of age engaging in sexual conduct.”
This sounds straightforward—until you realize that the law isn’t limited to real-life depictions. It explicitly includes:
AI-generated content
Cartoons
Drawings
Computer-generated animations
Even if no real child was involved, the image or animation can be considered illegal if it looks like a child and meets Texas’ legal definition of “obscene.”
The bill is a response to the rapid rise of AI-generated media and deepfake technology, which has made it easier to create explicit content that looks like it involves minors—without actually using real kids. The intent is to close legal loopholes that let people avoid prosecution simply because the images they possess or share are “fictional.”
Texas lawmakers argue that this kind of material still feeds into harmful behavior, even if it’s not real, and thus deserves criminal penalties.
The wording of the bill is both specific and slippery at the same time.
It clearly defines what “visual material” means, and it includes a wide range of mediums—from art to animations to AI content. But here’s where the problems start:
What counts as a child? The law targets any depiction that “appears to be of a child younger than 18.” That’s completely subjective, especially in artistic styles where characters often have youthful features, like anime or certain video game aesthetics.
What counts as “obscene”? According to Texas Penal Code, it has to meet the three-part “Miller test,” which looks at whether the material:
Appeals to prurient interests,
Is patently offensive, and
Lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value.
But obscenity is always up for interpretation. What one person finds artistic, another might find perverse—and under this bill, that interpretation could land someone in jail.
That’s where it gets messy. Think about popular games and shows that come from Japan, where characters often have youthful designs regardless of their actual age.
This could lead to:
Classic anime being unfairly targeted. Shows like Dragon Ball, Death Note, or Toilet-Bound Hanako-kun might contain characters who look young and are shown in sometimes suggestive ways.
Japanese video games facing bans or criminal charges. Franchises like Persona, Danganronpa, or Ace Attorney feature characters that, depending on interpretation, might fall under this law.
Artists and fans—especially those who engage in cosplay, fanart, or digital content creation—could also be caught in the crossfire. That means a huge segment of online culture, especially anime and gaming spaces, might suddenly be at legal risk.
The logistics of enforcing this law aren’t clear, but they’d likely involve:
Law enforcement reviewing online activity, cloud storage, or seized devices.
Digital forensic teams analyzing images to determine the source and subject.
Prosecutors trying to prove that a fictional or animated character “looks” like a child and that the image is “obscene.”
That’s a lot of legal grey area—and it raises the risk of false accusations, over-policing, and censorship of creative work.
There’s no question that protecting children from exploitation is critical. But Senate Bill 20 may cast its net too wide, sweeping in creators, artists, and fans who have no criminal intent. The law’s focus on fictional or stylized content opens the door to subjective enforcement and cultural censorship, especially against anime and Japanese media, which often defy Western norms of character design.
Laws like these need clarity, nuance, and safeguards to avoid criminalizing the wrong people. Without that, this bill risks becoming more about control than protection.
persona mentioned