Child pornography is unique among violent crimes in at
least one aspect: victims are harmed not only from their
initial abuse but also from knowing that people on the
Internet continue to view the images. In recent years, a
split has arisen among federal courts on whether victims
of child pornography are entitled to restitution from non-
production offenders, i.e., offenders that were not involved
in the initial abuse of victims. The controversy has
surrounded 18 U.S.C. § 2259-the mandatory restitution
statute for sex offenses. While some courts find victim
harm not sufficiently traceable to the crimes at issue to
grant restitution, other courts emphasize Congress's intent
to compensate victims in ordering restitution. The
problem with restitution in the child pornography context,
however, is deeper than just interpreting § 2259 for non-
production offenses. This Note suggests that a mandatory
fine for non-production offenders would alleviate not only
the causality problem but also other issues plaguing the
Jacques, Robert W.
"Amy and Vicky's Cause: Perils of the Federal Restitution Framework for Child Pornography Victims,"
Georgia Law Review: Vol. 45:
4, Article 7.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/glr/vol45/iss4/7