A bill to expand the state’s definition of sexual extortion to include threats of what is often referred to as “revenge porn,” was approved Wednesday by the Alabama Senate Committee on Judiciary.

But some committee members were wary to approve the bill, expressing concerns about the harshness of the penalties and false accusations.

Currently, the crime of sexual extortion in Alabama only applies to those who knowingly cause or attempt to cause another person to engage in a sexual act or to produce any sexual content under threat of injury to the body, property, or reputation of any person, according to state law.

If SB35,brought forth by Sen. Gerald Allen, R-Tuscaloosa, is passed, this would also apply to any Alabamian who “knowingly threatens to release or transmit any photograph, digital image, video, film, or other recording of any individual, whether recognizable or not, engaged in any act of sexually explicit conduct in order to compel or attempt to compel the victim to do any act or refrain from doing any act against his or her will,” making it punishable by up to 20 years in prison.

Sens. Will Barfoot, R-Montgomery, and Rodger Smitherman, D-Birmingham, shared strong support for Allen’s bill in committee.

“I want to thank you… for what you’re doing with this bill,” Smitherman told Allen Wednesday.

“We’ve seen many situations where we’ve had some of our young people who have actually committed suicide behind these kinds of extortions and threats and intimidations.”

But Sens. Linda Coleman-Madison, D-Birmingham, Vivian Figures, D-Mobile, and Bobby Singleton, D-Greensboro, said they had issues over the severity of the bill’s penalty and a lack of language requiring proof.

“I though the person is innocent until proven guilty,” Coleman-Madison said.

“Here, if I say I’m going to do it, even if I don’t do it, I’m guilty. You are making me guilty of a crime I have yet to commit.”

She said her worry was that everyday arguments between high schoolers or neighbors could escalate to a 20-year prison sentence for someone.

Figures also said she was worried that the penalty was too harsh and asked that Allen work with lawmakers to establish some requirements for proving that someone made a threat.

“I have sons,” she said.

“So maybe I think about different things…I mean, somebody could, when a relationship doesn’t go the way they want it to go, they could say that a person threatened them.”

“So maybe the penalty is a little stiff,” she continued.

“And I think there should be some language about the proof of it because anybody can make a threat.”

Allen agreed to work on amending the bill to address some of these concerns moving forward.

The bill was approved by a vote of 10-3 and will now go to the Senate for a full vote.