What? First, that has nothing to do with anything. Second, it's not true: most auditing has an in-person component, and many stings don't. Do you actually know what an audit is? Hint: a "pen test" isn't an audit and isn't much like an audit. Neither is a code review.
> Why does auditing always come up with this topic?
1. All security controls need to be audited.
2. There is a 100 percent chance that many of the organizations advocating for these laws, most of which would actually prefer for porn to be outlawed completely, will grab any chance they can to accuse sites of not complying. They'll either try to get sympathetic law enforcement agencies to take up those accusations, or, if they can find a legal avenue, they'll bring lawsuits themselves. They will undoubtedly find anecdotes of system failures, since any large-scale system will fail sometimes. They will claim that as evidence that the rules aren't being followed. Evidence, no matter how flimsy, has to be countered with other evidence, especially if you're in a "preponderance of the evidence" situation. It's pretty hard to show that what you're doing is reasonable or effective if you don't have at least a sample of records.
Like I said, I've seen no laws requiring any audits or record keeping, and actually every law I've seen explicitly makes such records illegal.
It seems to me that these bills aren't prescriptive (they say you can use a "commercially reasonable" method). Most states are also moving to adopt the ISO mDL standard[0].
[0] https://www.mdlconnection.com/implementation-tracker-map/