How have the courts interpreted a new section of section 2251(a) of the Child Pornography Act?

Defendant raises three challenges to his convictions. His primary argument - and the primary subject of this opinion - is that under 18 U.S.C. 2251(a), the Government was required to prove that he knew the materials used to produce the child pornography had traveled in interstate commerce. We review a district court's interpretation of a criminal statute de novo. United States v. Dahl, 314 F.3d 976, 977 (9th Cir. 2002).

Our court has not directly addressed the legal question Defendant raises regarding the mental state required under

Page 5