SPRINGFIELD, Ill. – The State of Illinois hopes its new “revenge porn” law will become a model for federal legislation. Set to take effect June 1, the statute outlaws disseminating embarrassing or humiliating images in any medium—print, broadcast, online or via mobile device—without consent, even if the victim voluntarily gave the perpetrator the image. In addition, the law specifically relieves prosecutors of any requirement to prove intent to harm.
Signed into law Dec. 29 by Democratic Gov. Pat Quinn, the law makes posting sexually explicit images and videos without permission of the individuals depicted a Class 4 felony, punishable by one to three years in prison, a fine of up to $25,000, and forfeiture of money or goods that change hands to facilitate the posting.
As in the 13 other states that have enacted revenge porn legislation, proponents and opponents continue to debate the issues. The pro side claims such laws are necessary to protect the privacy and careers of victims, an estimated 90 percent of whom are women. Proponents call revenge porn a type of sexual harassment. Those not in favor of legal crackdowns on the practice contend revenge porn laws stifle constitutionally guaranteed free speech.
Quinn and other supporters of the law would like to see Illinois’s legislation—or at least some kind of ban on the practice—adopted by the federal government. He labeled revenge porn “cyberbullying.”
“Cyberbullying can have lasting and often devastating effects on a person, especially when it involves the distribution of very personal images,” Quinn noted in a statement distributed by his office. “This shameful act can be as harmful as any other form of abuse.”
Like revenge porn laws in other states, Illinois’s closes a loophole in previous legislation. State law already prohibited posting images of children to porn sites, as well as nonconsensual porn-site posting of erotic or explicit images of adults. The new law adds a section specifically dealing with revenge porn.
State Representative Scott Drury [D-Highwood], one of the co-sponsors of the bill, said the biggest challenge legislators faced during consideration of the bill was what constituted “consent.” Detractors of the law, and some legislators, balked at the idea of prosecuting jilted lovers who may have obtained images legitimately during a relationship.
To counter that argument, Drury likened revenge porn to credit card fraud.
“Maybe the women [depicted in the explicit images] consented to the conduct, but they didn’t consent to [the images] being put on the internet,” he told the Huffington Post. “They’re not taking that consent back—they never gave it to begin with.
“It’s like a credit card,” Drury added. “When I go to a department store and give them my credit card, I’m not consenting for them to keep my credit card number and put it on the internet. It was hard to convince people they’re the same thing.”
He also advocated stiff federal penalties for revenge porn, calling the matter “a serious women’s rights and women’s protection issue.”
