PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Nov 14, 2007
Providing Resources, Officers, and Technology to Eradicate Cyber Threats to Our Children Act of 2007 or the PROTECT Our Children Act of 2007 - Title I: Special Counsel For Child Exploitation Prevention And Interdiction - (Sec. 101) Directs the Attorney General to appoint a Special Counsel for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction within the Office of the Deputy Attorney General. Sets forth the duties of the Special Counsel, including: (1) coordination of the policies and strategies of the Department of Justice (DOJ) related to the prevention and investigation of child exploitation cases; (2) coordination with other federal agencies, including the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, to combat child exploitation crimes; (3) coordination and oversight of the National Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program and the National Internet Crimes Against Children Data Network Center established by this Act; (4) providing training and technical assistance for law enforcement agencies to combat child exploitation crimes; and (5) developing and overseeing research programs for child exploitation prevention.
(Sec. 102) Establishes with DOJ a National Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC)Task Force Program consisting of state and local task forces (including at least one ICAC Task Force for each state) to address online enticement of children, child exploitation, and child obscenity and pornography cases.
(Sec. 103) Sets forth the purposes of the Program, including: (1) increasing the investigative capabilities of state and local law enforcement officers in the detection, investigation, and apprehension of child exploitation crimes facilitated by the Internet; (2) providing training and technical assistance to ICAC task forces and other federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies; (3) increasing the number of Internet crimes against children offenses to be investigated and prosecuted; (4) enhancing nationwide response to Internet crimes against children offenses; and (5) developing and delivering Internet crimes against children public awareness and prevention programs.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
(Sec. 104) Sets forth the duties and functions of state and local ICAC task forces relating to investigations, forensic examinations, and prosecutions of Internet crimes against children,
(Sec. 105) Directs the Attorney General to establish a National Internet Crimes Against Children Data Network Center to assist the National ICAC Task Force Program and federal, state, local, and tribal agencies investigating and prosecuting child exploitation. Requires the Center to develop and maintain an technology and training program to provide: (1) a secure system of online communications between ICAC task forces and federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies regarding ongoing investigations; (2) a secure online system for resolving case conflicts; (3) a secure data storage and analysis system; and (4) guidelines and technical assistance for the use of the Center by federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies.
Directs the Attorney General to establish an ICAC Data Network Center Steering Committee.
Authorizes appropriations for FY2009-FY2016.
(Sec. 106) Authorizes the Office of Justice Programs to award grants to state and local ICAC task forces. Sets forth criteria for the distribution of ICAC grants funds.
Requires state or local ICAC task forces receiving grants to submit annual reports to the Attorney General on the operations of such task forces.
Requires the Attorney General to report to Congress on: (1) the progress of ICAC task forces; and (2) the number of federal and state investigations, prosecutions, and convictions in the prior 12-month period related to child exploitation.
(Sec. 107) Authorizes appropriations for FY2009-FY2016.
Title II: Additional Measures to Combat Child Exploitation - (Sec. 201) Requires the Attorney General to: (1) establish additional computer forensic capacity to address the current backlog for computer forensics, including for child exploitation investigations; and (2) report to Congress annually on the use of funds for such purpose. Authorizes appropriations for FY2009-FY2016.
(Sec. 202) Authorizes appropriations for FY2009-FY2016 for the hiring of additional Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) agents and personnel to work solely on child exploitation cases as part of the FBI's Innocent Images National Initiative.
(Sec. 203) Authorizes appropriations for FY2009-FY2006 for the hiring of additional full-time personnel in the Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement and the U.S. Postal Service to work solely on child exploitation and child obscenity cases.
(Sec. 205) Requires the Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Postmaster General, to report annually to the House and Senate Judiciary Committees on the resources used by federal agencies to investigate and prosecute child exploitation and child obscenity cases.
People & committees
Rep. Wasserman Schultz, Debbie [D-FL-20] · D–FL
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 415 - 2 (Roll no. 1091). (text: CR 11/13/007 H13582-13585)
House roll call 1091 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 415 - 2 (Roll no. 1091).(text: CR 11/13/007 H13582-13585)
House roll call 1091 · Individual votesConsidered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H13884-13885)
At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 3845.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H13582-13589)
Ms. Wasserman Schultz moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 10, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.3845 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.3845 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.3845 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.3845 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.