> But it is a lot easier to have folks who are in charge of systems testify as to their authenticity than to have a child who has been abused testify to the aut

> But it is a lot easier to have folks who are in charge of systems testify as to their authenticity than to have a child who has been abused testify to the authenticity of the abuse, thus the logic is defensibly limited to child abuse. Exactly my point? We don't need to come up with a generic legal basis or reason, we can just say "CSAM is special" in a legal sense.