PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 35 · Passed Senate amended · Feb 11, 2015
Amy and Vicky Child Pornography Victim Restitution Improvement Act of 2015
(Sec. 3) Amends the federal criminal code to expand the definition of "full amount of the victim's losses" for purposes of provisions governing mandatory restitution of victims of offenses involving sexual exploitation and other abuse of children to include medical services, physical and occupational therapy or rehabilitation, and lost income for the victim's lifetime, as well as any losses suffered by the victim from any sexual act or contact or sexually explicit conduct in preparation for or during the production of child pornography depicting the victim involved in the offense.
Sets forth guidelines for determining restitution where the victim of of a specified child pornography offense was harmed by one defendant (requiring restitution for not less than the full amount of the victim's losses) or by more than one defendant (requiring restitution for not more than the full amount of the victim's losses and not less than specified minimum amounts for certain offenses).
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Requires joint and several liability where there are multiple defendants and allows each defendant who is ordered to pay restitution and who has made full payment to the victim equal to or exceeding the specified minimum amount to recover contribution from any other defendant ordered to pay. Sets forth contribution claim procedures.
Requires the Attorney General to report to Congress within one year after enactment of this Act on any progress of the Department of Justice in obtaining restitution for victims of such offenses.
People & committees
Sen. Hatch, Orrin G. [R-UT] · R–UT
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 98 - 0. Record Vote Number: 55. (text: CR S920)
Senate roll call 55 · Individual votesPassed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Yea-Nay Vote. 98 - 0. Record Vote Number: 55.(text: CR S920)
Senate roll call 55 · Individual votesMeasure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S916-920)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 16.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Grassley without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Reported by Senator Grassley without amendment. Without written report.
Committee on the Judiciary. Ordered to be reported without amendment favorably.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary. (Sponsor introductory remarks on measure: CR S602-603)
Introduced in Senate
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 S.295 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 S.295 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 S.295 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 S.295 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.