SESSION OF 2024
SUPPLEMENTAL NOTE ON SENATE BILL NO. 394
As Recommended by Senate Committee on
Judiciary

Brief*
SB 394 would create law requiring the use of age
verification technology to permit access to internet websites
containing material that is harmful to minors.

Definitions
The bill would define several terms used throughout the
bill, including the following:
● “Harmful to minors” would be defined in the same
manner as in the crime of promotion to minors of
material harmful to minors in the Criminal Code
and would mean that quality of any description,
exhibition, presentation, or representation, in
whatever form, of nudity, sexual conduct, sexual
excitement, or sadomasochistic abuse when the
material or performance, taken as a whole or, with
respect to a prosecution for an act described by
KSA 21-4602(a)(1), that portion of the material that
was actually exposed to the view of minors, having
the following characteristics:
○ The average adult person applying
contemporary community standards would
find the material or performance has a
predominant tendency to appeal to a prurient
interest in sex to minors;
____________________
*Supplemental notes are prepared by the Legislative Research
Department and do not express legislative intent. The supplemental
note and fiscal note for this bill may be accessed on the Internet at
http://www.kslegislature.org
 ○ The average adult person applying
contemporary community standards would
find the material or performance depicts or
describes nudity, sexual conduct, sexual
excitement, or sadomasochistic abuse in a
manner that is patently offensive to prevailing
standards in the adult community with respect
to what is suitable for minors; and
○ A reasonable person would find the material
or performance lacks serious literary,
scientific, educational, artistic, or political
value for minors;
● “Material” would mean any book, magazine,
newspaper, pamphlet, poster, print, picture, figure,
image, description, motion picture film, record,
recording tape, or video tape; and
● “Commercially reasonable method of age
verification” would mean:
○ Any method expressly approved by the
Attorney General (AG); or
○ Any method that is certified in documented
international standards for age verification, as
specified by the AG.
Age Verification Requirements
The bill would require any commercial entity that
knowingly shares or distributes material that is harmful to
minors on a website, and the material appears on 25.0
percent or more of the webpages viewed on the website in
any calendar month, or that knowingly hosts the website, to
verify any person who is a resident of or is located in the state
attempting to access the site is 18 years of age or older.
Under the bill it would be a violation to allow access to the
type of website described above without verifying the age of
the user.

2- 394
 The bill would require the age verification to be
conducted through the use of:
● A commercially available database that is regularly
used by businesses or governmental entities for
the purpose of age and identity verification; or
● Any other commercially reasonable method of age
and identity verification.
Violations and Penalties
AG Enforcement
The bill would allow any person who is able to access a
website without verifying their age to report the violation to
the AG. The AG would be required to investigate the violation
and could bring an action to enjoin any continuing violation
and impose a civil penalty on the commercial entity in
violation of the bill’s provisions. The penalty imposed could be
in an amount between $500 and $10,000 for each violation
and would clarify this penalty would be imposed instead of
any civil penalty recoverable in an action brought by the AG in
the Kansas Consumer Protection Act (KCPA). The bill would
specify that each instance in which a website is accessed
without proper verification constitutes a separate violation.
KCPA
The bill would state any violation pursuant to the bill
would be deemed an unconscionable act and practice under
the KCPA. For the purposes of remedies and penalties
provided by the KCPA:
● The person alleging a violation of the bill’s
provisions would be deemed a consumer;
● The commercial entity violating the bill’s provisions
would be deemed the supplier; and
3- 394
 ● Proof of a consumer transaction would not be
required.
Private Cause of Action
The bill would allow the parent or legal guardian of a
minor who was able to access a website without age
verification to bring a private action against the commercial
entity that permitted the access. The person bringing the
action could seek actual damages resulting from a minor’s
access to harmful material, statutory damages of no less than
$50,000, and reasonable attorney fees and costs.
Retention of Identifying Information Not Permitted
The bill would prohibit any commercial entity or third
party performing age verification pursuant to the bill from
retaining any identifying information, as defined by the bill, of
the individual after access has been granted to the website. If
a commercial entity is found to have knowingly retained
identifying information in violation of the bill’s provision, the
bill would require the commercial entity to be liable to the
individual for resulting damages, including reasonable
attorney fees and costs as ordered by the court.

Obligation and Liability of Internet Service Providers
The bill would specify that nothing in the bill could be
construed to impose an obligation or liability on an internet
service provider or the user of an interactive computer
service.

Background
The bill was introduced by the Senate Committee on
Judiciary at the request of Senator Claeys.

4- 394
 [Note: A companion bill, HB 2592, was introduced by the
House Committee on Judiciary at the request of
Representative Penn.]

Senate Committee on Judiciary
In the Senate Committee hearing, representatives of the
Age Verification Providers Association, Center for
Constitutional Liberty, Family Policy Alliance, Kansas Catholic
Conference, and Kansas Family Voice testified as
proponents of the bill. The proponents stated the bill is
necessary to protect minors from the harmful effects of
pornography easily accessed through the internet. Written-
only proponent testimony was provided by a representative of
Heritage Action for America and two private citizens.
Neutral testimony was provided by a representative of
the Heritage Foundation. The representative noted the
organization supports the merits of the policy contained in the
bill, but takes no position on enactment of the bill itself.
Written-only neutral testimony was provided by a
representative of TechNet Central.
Opponent testimony was provided by a representative
of NetChoice, who stated the bill would violate the First
Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, undermine the rights of
parents, and negatively impact advancements in internet
filtering technologies. Written-only opponent testimony was
provided by a representative of Brightspeed.

Fiscal Information
According to the fiscal note prepared by the Division of
the Budget on the bill, the Office of Attorney General (OAG)
indicates the bill would require State General Fund (SGF)
expenditures of at least $210,000 in FY 2025 and at least
$220,000 in FY 2026 to support 1.0 new FTE attorney
position and 1.0 new FTE legal assistant position. The OAG

5- 394
also anticipates legal challenges to the bill, but is unable to
calculate the amount of additional SGF resources required to
defend the bill from any legal challenges.
The Judicial Branch indicates the bill has the potential to
increase the number of cases filed in district courts. This may
increase agency operating expenditures due to the additional
time spent by district court judicial and nonjudicial personnel
in processing, researching, and hearing cases but is unable
to calculate an exact estimate of this effect. Likewise, the bill
has the potential to increase the collections of docket fees
that are deposited in the SGF but the amount of additional
docket fee collections is unknown. Any fiscal effect
associated with enactment of the bill is not reflected in The
FY 2025 Governor’s Budget Report.
Age verification technology; Kansas Consumer Protection Act; children and minors;
material harmful to minors; internet websites


6- 394