The War on Porn

Last week, Senator Jim Banks (R-Indiana) announced the introduction of the “Safety and Age Filtering Enforcement (SAFE) for Kids Act,” which would impose criminal penalties on platforms that fail to perform age verification of their users, if the platform is a “commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally publishes or distributes on an internet website material, of which greater than 1/3 of which is sexual material harmful to minors.”

Tortured syntax aside, this probably sounds like a reasonable idea to people who believe minors accessing internet porn is a big problem. Where some might find reason for pause, however, is the part where the bill spells out the consequences for platforms that run afoul of the new law, should the SAFE for Kids Act eventually meet with Donald Trump’s signature.

Under the bill, entities that knowingly violate the law “shall be fined under title 18, United States Code, imprisoned for not more than 5 years, or both.” The fine tops out at $1,500,000 if “the violation resulted in access to sexual material harmful to minors by not less than 100,000 minors… the covered commercial entity had profits of more than $1,000,000 during any year that were attributable to the violation,” or “the covered commercial entity engaged in efforts to deceive the Attorney General or the Commission or obstruct an investigation of an alleged violation of this Act.”

But hey, if you’re a libertarian type who thinks maybe putting people behind bars for years for failing to verify the age of a website visitor might be a bit of overkill, don’t worry: This SAFE for Kids Act effort is also about fighting communism, or woke-ism, or maybe both.

Banks’ press release asserted that the SAFE for Kids Act by “a broad coalition of organizations and advocates,” but one glance at the list of groups and individuals supporting the bill suggests that the broadness in question must be geographical, as opposed to ideological.

The bill’s supporter list includes the American Principles Project, Heritage Action, Clare Morell and Chloe Lawrence of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, Institute for Family Studies, National Decency Coalition, Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission and Concerned Women for America. (If you find evidence of any of these organizations taking a position that’s to the left of one taken by, say, Pat Buchanan, please let me know.)

Underscoring the decidedly rightward bent of the bill’s supporters is a quote from Kevin Roberts, the President of Heritage Action.

“Americans are angry that their kids are being indoctrinated into a left-wing ideology intended to infiltrate their hearts and corrupt their moral center,” Roberts said. “Parents deserve laws that empower them to protect their children. The SAFE for Kids Act is a necessary solution that will finally hold individuals and companies liable if they fail to implement meaningful safeguards to prevent minors from being exposed to explicit content.”

Roberts didn’t bother to draw a line connecting the alleged indoctrination into a left-wing ideology to the availability of sexually explicit content online, likely because he believes he didn’t need to do so. It’s just manifest, right? Porno people are a bunch of lefties, everyone knowns that!

Well, try telling that to the likes of Richelle Ryan, Brandi Love, or any number of the adult business owners and entrepreneurs who have voted for Trump over the last few election cycles (and in some cases, probably began voting Republican long before Trump decided he didn’t want to represent the Reform Party, after all).

Are we to believe these folks are trying to indoctrinate their viewers into an ideology against which they’ve voted in the past? Or are we to understand that these sneaky smut-slingers are clandestinely attempting to sway young minds in the other direction? Is ostensibly conservative-authored porn simply ANTIFA erotica in MAGA clothing?

I suppose in the end, in the immediate context, it doesn’t matter. If the SAFE for Kids Act becomes law and one of their sites is deemed to be in willful noncompliance with the law, presumably those porn industry conservatives will be subject to fines and imprisonment, just like anyone else in that situation.

Unless, of course, they happen to have assaulted a police officer outside the halls of Congress a little over five years ago. In that case, they’ve clearly been mistreated by a Weaponized Justice System and will receive a Full and Proper Pardon. That’s simply what decency demands.

LUXEMBOURG — A decision from the European Union’s highest court on Tuesday handed a victory to France in its effort to apply age-verification requirements to foreign pornography websites on an individual basis.

The Court of Justice of the European Union agreed with France’s position that member states have the authority to enforce their age-verification laws against websites operating outside their borders. The ruling has implications across the European Union, where similar measures could be pursued by other member nations.

The legal challenge was brought by WebGroup Czech Republic and NKL Associates, the parent companies behind XVideos and XNXX. Their lawyers argued that France’s legislation conflicts with the EU’s e-commerce directive, which treats the bloc as a unified digital marketplace and is built around what is known as the country-of-origin principle.

Under that principle, online platforms are generally regulated by the laws of the country where they are established and operate. The framework was created to promote consistency throughout the European Union and to avoid requiring technology companies to navigate a patchwork of 27 separate national regulatory systems.

The court concluded that French authorities may require age-verification measures on adult entertainment websites even when those companies are headquartered in another EU member state, such as the Czech Republic or Cyprus. As a result, some operators could face regulatory obligations and potential penalties from both France and their home countries. Cyprus serves as the base for several Aylo-affiliated technology companies that operate Pornhub, MyDirtyHobby and other sites within the company’s portfolio of free and subscription-based platforms.

“Such measures may nevertheless be taken, on a case-by-case basis, in compliance with the material and procedural conditions set out in the directive,” said Thomas von Danwitz, vice-president of the EU Court of Justice, in explaining the court’s move away from the country of origin principle.

The ruling is expected to have particular significance for Aylo and WebGroup Czech Republic, both of which have previously been involved in disputes with French regulators over age-verification requirements.

WASHINGTON — Sen. Jim Banks, a Republican representing Indiana, announced Wednesday that he has introduced a federal age verification measure that would require users nationwide to verify both their age and identity before accessing platforms where at least one-third of the content is classified as sexually explicit.

The proposal arrives just weeks after Banks urged President Donald J. Trump’s Justice Department to resume obscenity prosecutions. In the latest development, the senator unveiled the Safety and Age Filtering Enforcement (SAFE) for Kids Act.

“Kids should not be exposed to pornography with just a few clicks,” Banks said in a press statement. “The SAFE for Kids Act helps parents protect their children and bring commonsense safeguards nationwide.” Modeled in many respects on age verification laws already adopted in roughly half of U.S. states, the legislation would require what it describes as “reasonable” age verification and digital identification measures for access to websites containing adult content.

A copy of the bill reviewed by reporters states that, if enacted, the federal government would define a “covered commercial entity” as any “commercial entity that knowingly and intentionally publishes or distributes on an internet website material, of which greater than 1/3 is sexual material harmful to minors.”

The bill would also allow prosecution of “any officer, director, or employee … engaged in the performance of the duties of the individual as an officer, director, or employee.”

Under the proposed legislation, the phrase “sexual material harmful to minors” consists of three elements. Those are defined as “(A) the average individual applying contemporary community standards would find, taking the material as a whole and with respect to minors, is designed to appeal or to pander to the prurient interest; (B) in a manner patently offensive with respect to minors, exploits, is devoted to, or principally consists of descriptions of, actual simulated, or animated displays or depictions of sexual act or sexual contact as defined under … United States Code; [and] (C) taken as a whole, lacks serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.”

Aside from the broad scope of the definitions, enforcement responsibilities under the bill would fall to both the Federal Trade Commission and the office of the Attorney General within the Justice Department. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who previously served as Trump’s defense attorney during the Stormy Daniels hush money case in New York, would oversee criminal prosecutions under the proposal.

According to the bill’s text, criminal penalties could be pursued against the owners and operators of platforms accused of violating the legislation’s age verification requirements.

“The Attorney General may initiate a criminal investigation of a covered commercial entity that the Attorney General has reason to believe, and may initiate a prosecution of a covered commercial entity that the Attorney General determines is knowingly violating, or has knowingly violated, this act,” the bill’s language notes.

If the measure were signed into law and enforced, individuals found in violation could face up to five years in prison and be convicted of a federal felony. The legislation also authorizes fines of up to $750,000 for individuals and $1.5 million for organizations.

Criminal penalties could additionally apply to commercial entities that earned more than $1 million in profits during any year tied to the alleged violations, as well as to entities or individuals accused of attempting to “deceive” or “obstruct” either the Justice Department or the FTC.

The proposal also grants the FTC broad civil enforcement powers. The agency has previously expressed support for federal age verification requirements.

In addition, the legislation creates a federal private right of action. The bill’s expansive reach reflects proposals championed by several conservative activists and policy organizations that have supported anti-pornography initiatives associated with Project 2025.

Project 2025 was introduced as a policy framework designed to prepare for a potential return of President Trump to the White House. Kevin Roberts, president of the Heritage Foundation, previously advocated for a ban on pornography and the removal of First Amendment protections for the industry within the project’s policy blueprint.

Russ Vought, a key architect of Project 2025 and the current director of Trump’s Office of Management and Budget, was recorded by undercover British journalists saying that age verification laws could function as the “back door” to implementing the pornography ban Roberts had discussed.

Roberts also endorsed the SAFE for Kids Act in the same press release. He said, “Congress must act now to protect our children from adult content on the internet. No more excuses.

“While Washington drags its feet, kids across the nation are being exposed to vile, pornographic images and ads with no meaningful safeguards to prevent it,” Roberts asserted. “Americans are angry that their kids are being indoctrinated into a left-wing ideology intended to infiltrate their hearts and corrupt their moral center.”

Among the other organizations and individuals supporting the SAFE for Kids Act are Heritage Action, the Ethics and Public Policy Center, the Institute for Family Studies, the National Decency Coalition, Concerned Women for America, and the Southern Baptist Convention’s Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission.

Stakeholders within the adult entertainment industry have voiced concerns about the legislation. Alison Boden, executive director of the Free Speech Coalition, said she was not surprised by the proposal.

“Apparently, the usual anti-porn suspects convinced Sen. Banks … to put his name on yet another unserious messaging bill,” Boden said. “There are members of Congress who are engaging on this issue in good faith, but Jim Banks is not one of them.”

Adult industry attorney Corey Silverstein also criticized the measure while acknowledging the broader objective behind it. “Protecting minors from accessing adult content is a goal everyone can agree on.

“The real question is whether government-mandated age verification laws actually achieve that goal without creating serious privacy and free speech concerns for adults,” he added. “Requiring people to upload identification or sensitive personal information to access legal content creates new risks, including data breaches and chilling lawful expression.”

Lawrence Walters, another attorney who represents clients in the adult entertainment industry, said the legislation raises significant constitutional questions.

“Substantial free speech and privacy concerns arise when the government seeks to impose mandatory age verification on websites based on the content of the speech published on those sites,” Walters said. “While the U.S. Supreme Court has approved of one such law in Texas, other similar laws could go too far and remain subject to constitutional challenges.

“This bill imposes significant criminal penalties on alleged violators, and the obligations specifically apply to officers, directors, and employees of covered website operators,” he continued. “The Supreme Court has not considered whether such a broad criminal prohibition is constitutionally sound.”

WASHINGTON — A familiar accusation in American politics has landed back in the spotlight, this time with subpoenas attached.

Former Fox News anchor and federal prosecutor Jeanine Pirro, now serving as U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, issued broad subpoenas this week to several major financial institutions as part of an investigation into whether customers were unlawfully denied banking services because of their political beliefs, ideological affiliations or professions.

The inquiries center on allegations that banks discriminated against people because they identified as politically conservative or were connected to organizations such as conservative Christian groups or activities that some civil society organizations have classified as right-wing extremism.

According to multiple reports, institutions including JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America and Wells Fargo received subpoenas. Pirro and federal prosecutors are reportedly exploring potential sanctions and charges under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, a law that gained prominence during efforts to hold banks accountable following the 2008 mortgage crisis.

Given the legal approach being taken, the investigation is drawing attention within the adult industry, where concerns about debanking and unequal access to financial services have persisted for years. For many in that space, the issue isn’t theoretical. It’s part of doing business.

The Free Speech Coalition, a trade organization representing the adult industry, has spent years urging Congress and federal officials to adopt fairer banking policies, particularly for people engaged in legal, consensual sex work or occupations connected to the adult sector. The group has also highlighted areas of overlap with conservative activists who have raised similar complaints involving firearm retailers, check-cashing businesses, pawn shops, religious organizations and other industries they say have faced restrictions from financial institutions.

The coalition is also pursuing plans to establish a federally chartered credit union dedicated to serving the adult industry. The goal is to provide an alternative to major banks and reduce the effects of debanking. The broader issue remains contentious and heavily debated. Still, investigations conducted by news organizations and advocacy groups, including the American Civil Liberties Union, have prompted calls for reforms from federal regulators and self-regulatory bodies overseeing banking and payment processing.

It is important to note that Pirro’s subpoenas could only be issued on behalf of preferred groups and individuals.

The New York Post cited allegations connected to a lawsuit brought by President Donald J. Trump against JPMorgan Chase. According to those claims, a former bank executive informed Trump and members of his family that certain accounts would be closed following the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.

Pirro has also been outspoken in her criticism of what she characterizes as institutional bias against conservatives and right-wing figures within the financial sector.

Even so, federal law requires banks to provide equitable access to financial products and services. Previous reporting noted that the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, which operates within the Treasury Department, found that nine of the nation’s largest banks had limited services to some clients operating in industries considered controversial.

Early in his administration, President Trump signed an executive order directing the OCC to examine allegations of debanking. Preliminary findings from that review indicated that institutions including JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citibank, Wells Fargo, U.S. Bank, Capital One, PNC Bank, TD Bank and BMO Bank had engaged in debanking practices.

While it’s probably not what the man is most remembered for, Charles Humprey Keating Jr. was a seminal figure in the early days of the War on Porn in the United States. A staunch proponent of censorship, Keating was one of the founders of Citizens for Decent Literature (“CDL”), a group established in 1958 in Cincinnati, Ohio.

Over the years, CDL rebranded several times, including as “Citizens for Decency through Law,” but the mission remained the same: To advocate for reading ‘the classics,’ as opposed to “smut” – and to vigorously enforce the nation’s obscenity laws, of course.

CDL would grow into an organization with over 300 chapters across the country, claiming membership of over 100,000 people. Over the years, the group would go on to mail tens of millions of letters advancing its agenda and submit amicus curiae (“friend of the court”) briefs in numerous cases that went before the Supreme Court. The group also counseled municipalities on prosecuting retailers who sold pornographic material and lobbied legislatures around the country on how to amend and strengthen their obscenity laws.

Keating believed pornography was the root of many societal ills, including a variety of criminal behaviors. In testimony he gave before the House Judiciary Committee on mail-order porn in 1958, Keating asserted that pornography was “capable of poisoning any mind at any age and of perverting our entire younger generation.” Seeking to tie porn to another animating fear prevalent in the late 50s, Keating also quoted a Senate Committee report which claimed that “part of the Communist conspiracy was to print” pornographic material.

In 1969, Keating was appointed to the President’s Commission on Obscenity and Pornography, which had launched under Nixon’s predecessor in the Oval Office, Lyndon Johnson. (The Commission also included members of Operation Yorkville, subject of another Origins of the War on Porn article.)

When the Commission eventually published a report holding that porn isn’t degrading the morals of adults or causing crime – and recommending that existing obscenity laws that prohibited adults from obtaining and possessing obscene materials be repealed – Keating was incensed. He went so far as to obtain a temporary restraining order on publication of the report until he could prepare a rebuttal. Keating was granted the TRO and two weeks to craft his response.

“At a time when the spread of pornography has reached epidemic proportions in our country and when the moral fiber of our nation seems to be rapidly unravelling, the desperate need is for enlightenment and intelligent control of the poisons which threaten us – not the declaration of moral bankruptcy inherent in the repeal of the laws which have been the defense of decent people against the pornographer for profit,” Keating wrote. “One can consult all the experts he chooses, can write reports, make studies, etc., but the fact that obscenity corrupts lies within the common sense, the reason, and the logic of every man.”

Keating’s participation in the Commission boosted his standing and gave him a platform for continuing to push for censorship and prosecution of obscenity crimes. He and CDL would go on to lead efforts to block the screening of Russ Meyer films, prevent the performance of theatrical releases like Oh! Calcutta! and push for the censorship of publications like Playboy and other softcore adult magazines.

Keating’s name would come to resonate in the public consciousness quite differently as the decades wore on. While he maintained his fight against “indecency,” what he became better known for, arguably at least, was his role in the country’s nationwide “savings and loan crisis,” in which Keating’s company, the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association, played a central role.

The facts surrounding Lincoln Savings and Loan scandal and the eventual prosecution related to it are complicated and well beyond the scope of this article. But to make a long story somewhat shorter, the savings and loan crises eventually metastasized into fiasco with an impact of over $500 billion and even a summarized version of the tale presents a winding road.

In September 1989, Regulators filed a $1.1 billion action against Keating and his associates for fraud and racketeering. Keating was later indicted on 42 counts in California, accusing Lincoln of fooling customers of ‘junk bonds’ pertaining to the American Continental Corporation, which had gone bankrupt in April,1989. Keating was sentenced to 10 years in prison by Judge Lance Ito, the same jurist who presided over the infamous O.J. Simpson double-homicide case.

In January 1993, a federal conviction followed his state crime conviction and Keating was found guilty on 73 counts of fraud, conspiracy and racketeering. He was given a 12.5-year sentence and ordered to pay restitution of $122 million.

Keating’s convictions were later overturned on appeal, but he also entered into a plea agreement in a federal case in which he admitted to four counts of wire fraud and bankruptcy fraud. Prosecutors dropped the other charges against Keating and his son, and Keating was sentenced to time served.

Charles Keating died in Phoenix, Arizona, in 2014 at the age of 90. Until the end, he maintained his innocence in the savings and loan fiasco (a claim that didn’t square particularly well with his admission of guilt in the plea bargain) – and continued to rail against sexually explicit expression.

In the end, it appears Keating’s definition of “decency” didn’t include a need to stick to fair dealing in business, or to take accountability when his reckless actions harmed tens of thousands of his customers.

Protecting children from harmful online content may seem like a simple goal. Yet questions continue to surface about whether age verification systems can achieve that objective without creating new concerns of their own. As the UK moves toward stricter age checks for social media access, some technology policy experts argue that the measures could introduce unintended consequences while leaving broader issues unresolved.

A Technological Solution Under Scrutiny

Critics of age verification requirements say the systems depend heavily on collecting personal information, raising concerns about privacy and long-term data storage.

The Foundation for Information Policy Research (FIPR) submitted evidence arguing that mandatory age verification is unlikely to address many of the issues parents worry about most, including harmful content and platform features designed to encourage prolonged use. According to Ben Collier, chair of FIPR, it can be tempting to look for “magic technological fixes,” but he said such approaches may increase the influence of major technology companies while shifting attention away from wider social and platform-related concerns. The UK’s Online Safety Act establishes the legal basis for these requirements and gives regulators authority to enforce age-assurance measures across a range of online services.

Privacy Concerns Remain Central

Supporters and critics alike agree that online verification differs significantly from traditional age checks conducted in person.

Many age verification systems rely on methods such as facial analysis, government-issued identification uploads, or credit card information. Unlike presenting identification briefly in a physical location, digital verification can create records connected to online activity. FIPR pointed to Facebook’s use of security phone numbers for advertising purposes in 2018 as an example of how information collected for one purpose can later be used differently. The organization also noted that some verification technologies may be less effective for minority groups and people with disabilities, potentially creating barriers to access for certain users.

The Challenge of Circumvention

Experts also question how effective age verification systems will be when users actively seek ways around them.

Children and teenagers already use a variety of techniques to bypass age-detection tools, including image filters that alter appearance and AI-generated images capable of misleading verification systems. Markets for false identification and pre-verified accounts continue to exist, while technologies such as VPNs and the Tor network remain widely available. Some observers warn that if mainstream platforms impose strict verification requirements, younger users may migrate to less regulated services where content moderation is weaker and potentially more harmful material is easier to access.

Alternative Models Gain Attention

Some researchers argue that content-based controls may offer another path for protecting younger internet users.

FIPR has proposed a system based on content classification and filtering, similar to age-rating systems used for films. Under this approach, websites would label content categories, while devices or software settings controlled by parents—or by older children themselves—could restrict access to material deemed inappropriate. Supporters of the model say it focuses directly on the content being accessed rather than requiring users to verify their identity. As governments around the world consider similar policies, including recent social media restrictions in Australia, decisions about how these systems are designed and enforced are expected to play a significant role in shaping online experiences for families in the years ahead.

DES MOINES, Iowa — Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds signed the state’s age verification legislation into law on Monday, approving a measure aimed specifically at pornography websites along with a number of other bills passed during the legislative session that concluded May 3.

The Iowa Senate had previously voted unanimously to approve a revised version of House File 864, legislation directed at websites and platforms that contain specified amounts of content deemed “harmful to minors.”

House File 864 is now law as “an act requiring persons who operate certain internet sites, applications, or a segment of an internet site or application that contains material pornographic for minors to perform reasonable age verification.”

The law grants enforcement authority to the Iowa Attorney General’s Office, led by Attorney General Brenna Bird. Under the measure, websites and platforms covered by the law may face penalties of up to $10,000 for each violation.

“The attorney general may bring a civil action to provide for civil penalties in an amount not more than $100,000” if a platform fails to comply with a court injunction, according to the legislation.

As with similar age verification laws enacted in other states, operators of online pornography platforms may use third-party providers to conduct what the law describes as reasonable age verification. Those providers are prohibited from retaining information collected through the verification process, although they must provide relevant data if ordered to do so by a state court.

BRASILIA, Brazil — Brazil’s National Data Protection Authority (ANPD) on Monday launched a new online portal that allows citizens to report potential violations of the country’s Digital Statute for Children and Adolescents, known as the Digital ECA, which requires adult websites to verify the age of users accessing content from within Brazil.

In a statement announcing the initiative, the agency said it will review all submitted complaints to identify companies and online platforms that may not be complying with the requirements of the Digital ECA.

Among the issues identified on the reporting portal as falling under ANPD oversight are the “absence or deficiency of age verification/checking mechanisms on platforms” and the “lack of adequate security mechanisms to prevent/mitigate access to inappropriate, unsuitable, or prohibited content.”

ANPD Superintendent of Inspection Fabrício Guimarães said that while the agency will not provide individual responses to every complaint, the information received will help determine whether a formal investigation into a specific company is warranted.

The Digital ECA requires adult content providers to implement age verification measures that go beyond simple self-declaration and applies regardless of where a website operator is located. ANPD has also outlined a phased approach to compliance oversight as enforcement efforts expand. The first phase, which is currently underway, includes public consultations aimed at broadening and refining compliance guidelines.

WARSAW, Poland — Poland’s Council of Ministers on Tuesday approved a proposed nationwide measure that would require websites and online platforms to verify users’ ages in an effort to prevent minors from accessing adult content online.

Deputy Minister of Digital Affairs Michał Gramatyka described the proposed Act on the Protection of Minors Against Access to Pornographic Content as “crucial.”

“Websites containing such content are currently not effectively protected against access, often accidental, by minors,” Gramatyka said.

According to a statement from the Ministry of Digital Affairs, the legislation “does not impose specific technical solutions on providers, but rather specifies which age verification mechanisms are recommended.”

The ministry is promoting the use of the European Digital Identity Wallet as part of the implementation of new age verification requirements, Deputy Minister of Digital Affairs Dariusz Standerski said.

“We plan to launch secure and anonymous age verification by the end of 2026,” Standerski said.

If enacted, the legislation would require telecommunications providers to block access to websites that do not comply with age verification rules. Companies that fail to meet the requirements could also face financial penalties.

The proposal must still be considered by Poland’s parliament and receive approval from President Karol Nawrocki, who earlier this year vetoed legislation that would have implemented the European Union’s Digital Services Act, including provisions related to age verification.

Poland has fallen behind several other European Union member states in implementing Digital Services Act requirements and could face action from the European Commission for failing to enforce the regulations.

KYIV — Ukraine’s parliament failed to approve a proposed measure that would have decriminalized pornography across the country.

Since gaining independence following the collapse of the Soviet Union, Ukraine has maintained laws prohibiting pornography and obscenity, even as the nation’s adult-content industry has continued to expand.

“It’s very unfortunate,” said Ruslan Stefanchuk, chair of the Rada, according to the Ukrainian News Agency. “I would have liked to see real liberalization, but apparently the Soviet mindset is still firmly entrenched.”

Member of Parliament Yaroslav Zheleznyak spearheaded the effort to repeal the country’s longstanding Soviet-era restrictions on pornography. The law is “nothing short of stupidity,” Zheleznyak told Kyiv Post journalist Kateryna Zakharchenko in an August 2023 interview. The bill ultimately received 207 votes, falling short of the 226 needed for approval.

Ukraine’s Ministry of Internal Affairs said it had no objections to the wording of the legislation. Despite that position, supporters of the measure were unable to secure enough votes for it to pass.

The failed vote comes as Ukraine’s Security Service and other law enforcement agencies continue investigating an alleged corruption scheme involving regional police officials. Authorities say the officials accepted bribes in exchange for ignoring illegal pornography production operations and adult-content creators operating in several parts of the country.