PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 49 · Public Law · Nov 17, 2008
Child Safe Viewing Act of 2007 - Requires the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to initiate a notice of inquiry to consider measures to examine: (1) the existence and availability of advanced blocking technologies that are compatible with various communications devices or platforms; (2) methods of encouraging the development, deployment, and use of such technology by parents that do not affect the packaging or pricing of a content provider's offering; and (3) the availability and use of parental empowerment tools and initiatives already in the market.
Requires that the FCC consider advanced blocking technologies that: (1) may be appropriate across a wide variety of distribution platforms (including wired, wireless, and Internet platforms) and transmitting or receiving devices; (2) can filter language based on information in closed captioning; (3) operate independently of the program creator's ratings; and (4) may enhance the parent's ability to protect his or her child from indecent or objectionable programming, as determined by that parent.
Requires a report to Congress.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Defines "advanced blocking technologies" as technologies that can improve or enhance the ability of a parent to protect his or her child from any indecent or objectionable video or audio programming, as determined by the parent, transmitted through wire, wireless, or radio communication.
People & committees
Sen. Pryor, Mark L. [D-AR] · D–AR
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Became Public Law No: 110-452.
Became Public Law No: 110-452.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Presented to President.
Presented to President.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Cleared for White House.
Senate agreed to the House amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S10601)
Resolving differences -- Senate actions: Senate agreed to the House amendment by Unanimous Consent.(consideration: CR S10601)
Message on House action received in Senate and at desk: House amendment to Senate bill.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On passage Passed without objection.
Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed without objection.
Considered by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR H10807-10808)
Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
Committee on Energy and Commerce discharged.
Ms. DeGette asked unanimous consent to discharge from committee and consider.
Referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce.
Received in the House.
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent. (text: CR S10199)
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment by Unanimous Consent.(text: CR S10199)
The committee substitute as amended agreed to by Unanimous Consent.
Measure laid before Senate by unanimous consent. (consideration: CR S10199; text of measure as reported in Senate: CR S10199)
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 588.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Inouye with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 110-268.
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. Reported by Senator Inouye with an amendment in the nature of a substitute. With written report No. 110-268.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2231)
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. (text of measure as introduced: CR 2/26/2007 S2231)
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2025)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Sep 8, 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.602 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.602 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.602 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.602 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.