i understand why the cda provided immunity to isps in the first instance. there's an intellectual appreciation for why that was the case. but i like some others on this committee and i have, met with a mother whose daughter was advertised. and when you hear what these ads are and what is -- and what it said it really , hits you in a way that compels you to say, that's simply not acceptable and we need to create a standard by which an isp and others can be liable or they have more of a responsibility than has thus far been required of them. the question i have is can you talk about the successful efforts that were taken online during the operation and how if at all we can revise section 230 of the cda to improve these efforts? i would point specifically to the reckless disregard standard the information is in front of a sex -- is in furtherance of a sex trafficking charge. i think that's very helpful language of ms. wagner's bill as well -- normally we are hesitant to give , state investigative authorities, state law enforcement jurisdiction over internet ty

courts have been unable to find their way around the current application of the cda, a statute over 21 years old and has created broad immunity. these courts have called on congress to clarify that all facilitators of online sex trafficking, including websites are not legally protected. the house of representatives and the senate have worked on parallel tracks to develop bills that respond to the recent court decisions and reconcile the cda with protections granted to victims under the federal trafficking statute. we believe these bills address the specific legal barriers faesed by child sex trafficking victims. first, insuring that state attorneys general have the authority to protect children in their own states and bring civil action against online entities that participate in sex trafficking. second, clarifying that sex trafficking victims can pursue civil remedies against everyone who participates in their trafficking, including websites. and third, defining participation in a trafficking venture under federal law as assisting, supporting or facilitating sex trafficking. these bro