The Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld a lower court's decision to dismiss a possession charge against Steven Anderegg, who was accused of producing and distributing virtual child sexual abuse material (CSAM). The ruling, decided on August 25, 2026, is significant as it addresses the intersection of evolving technology and First Amendment rights.
Anderegg faced multiple charges, including the possession of obscene virtual CSAM, which he created using artificial intelligence software. The dismissal of the possession charge has implications for how the law interprets the possession of virtual materials, particularly in relation to minors and obscenity laws.
This case began when the government charged Anderegg with producing and distributing images of minors engaged in sexually explicit conduct. The images were reportedly generated using Stable Diffusion, a generative AI model. The case reached the Seventh Circuit after the district court dismissed the possession charge, citing First Amendment protections for obscene materials in the privacy of one’s home.
In October 2023, Meta Platforms reported to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children about potential CSAM transmitted via Instagram. Law enforcement linked the account to Anderegg, who was a software engineer with experience in AI. Following a search of his home, authorities found evidence that he created numerous images depicting minors in sexually explicit scenarios.
After being charged under 18 U.S.C. § 1466A, Anderegg filed a motion to dismiss the possession charge, arguing it violated his First Amendment rights. The district court agreed, stating that the law was unconstitutional as applied to him, referencing the Supreme Court's decision in Stanley v. Georgia, which protects the right to possess obscene materials in one’s home.
The government appealed the dismissal, arguing that the possession of virtual CSAM should not be protected under the same principles as traditional obscenity laws. The Seventh Circuit, led by Judge Lee, reviewed the case and ultimately affirmed the district court's decision.
The court noted, "Given the relentless advancement in artificial intelligence models, we have some concerns about the lines these cases draw, but we are not free to redraw them ourselves." This statement reflects the court's acknowledgment of the challenges posed by new technology in the realm of obscenity and child protection laws.
In its ruling, the Seventh Circuit highlighted the distinction between virtual CSAM and actual CSAM, referencing previous Supreme Court decisions that have shaped the legal landscape surrounding child pornography. The court emphasized that the images involved in this case did not depict actual children, which played a crucial role in its decision.
The ruling is significant as it underscores the complexities of applying existing laws to modern technology, particularly in cases involving virtual representations of minors. The court's decision may influence future cases involving similar charges and the use of generative AI in creating explicit content.
Looking ahead, this ruling may set a precedent for how courts handle cases involving virtual CSAM. It raises questions about the balance between protecting children from exploitation and upholding constitutional rights related to free speech and expression. As technology continues to evolve, the legal system will likely face further challenges in navigating these issues.
Details were not available in the court filing regarding whether the government plans to pursue further legal action against Anderegg following this ruling. The case highlights the ongoing debate surrounding the regulation of virtual content and its implications for society.