PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Dec 7, 2012
(This measure has not been amended since it was passed by the House on August 1, 2012. The summary of that version is repeated here.)
Child Protection Act of 2012 - Amends the federal criminal code to impose a fine and/or prison term of up to 20 years for transporting, receiving, distributing, selling, or possessing pornographic images of a child under the age of 12. Requires a U.S. district court to issue a protective order prohibiting harassment or intimidation of a minor victim or witness if the court finds evidence that the conduct at issue is reasonably likely to adversely affect the willingness of the minor witness or victim to testify or otherwise participate in a federal criminal case or investigation.
Directs the U.S. Sentencing Commission to review and amend the federal sentencing guidelines and policy statements to ensure that such guidelines provide an additional penalty for sex trafficking of children and other child abuse crimes.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Allows the Director of the U.S. Marshals Service to issue an administrative subpoena for the investigation of unregistered sex offenders by the U.S. Marshals Service.
Amends the PROTECT Our Children Act of 2008 to: (1) double the amount that the Attorney General may award a non-law enforcement agency entity annually to establish and conduct training courses for National Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program task force members and other law enforcement officials, (2) require the Attorney General to designate a senior official at the Department of Justice (DOJ) with experience in investigating or prosecuting child exploitation cases as the National Coordinator for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction to be responsible for coordinating the development of the National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction, (3) authorize appropriations for carrying out such strategy for FY2014-FY2018, (4) delete a requirement that the National Internet Crimes Against Children Data System identify high-priority suspects based on the volume of suspected criminal activity, and (5) require the Attorney General to report within 90 days after enactment of this Act on the status of the establishment of such System.
People & committees
Rep. Smith, Lamar [R-TX-21] · R–TX
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 112-206.
Became Public Law No: 112-206.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S6908)
Senate Committee on the Judiciary discharged by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S6908)
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 Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR 7/31/2012 H5507-5508)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR 7/31/2012 H5507-5508)
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H5619)
At the conclusion of debate, the chair put the question on the motion to suspend the rules. Mr. Smith (TX) objected to the vote on the grounds that a quorum was not present. Further proceedings on the motion were postponed. The point of no quorum was withdrawn.
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 6063.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H5507-5510)
Mr. Smith (TX) moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 459.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-638.
Reported (Amended) by the Committee on Judiciary. H. Rept. 112-638.
Ordered to be Reported by Voice Vote.
Committee Consideration and Mark-up Session Held.
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.6063 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.6063 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.6063 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.6063 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.