The defense can make the case that the child can only ascent to behavior and not consent to it due to them being a minor.

-----

(Segue but still relevant)

Legal questions like this is why DACA was structured a specific way with the details when it was implemented in 2012 and 2014. Where people that were 15.9 years or younger when they cross the border were the only ones allowed to apply for DACA. If they were 18 or older in many jurisdictions they were breaking the law, and the age between 16 to 17.9 is a legal nebulous zone which they were trying to avoid for they did not wanted DACA to go to the courts on shaky legal ground and thus with DACA craft the executive order on the strongest ground while also covering the most people.

Various "Dreamer" legislation in the past such as the Hatch and Durbin 2001 legislation would have covered more people (it is a larger group) with the 2001 legislation would have covered people up to the age of 18 when they crossed the border via land, ship, or air. Now remember there is not one Dreamer legislation for the details of bills in 2009, 2010, 2011, and 2012 were different and remember there were also people in Negotianting Rooms that were proposing various different language when they were trying to create a coalition that will make 60 senators (filibuster), or 67 senators (president veto), or the US House happy (the Speaker of the House has to be for the legislation or there has to be a discharge petition, and most of the time Rs controlled the House from 2001 to 2019, or they controlled the Senate, or Ds controlled the Senate but there was not enough support to break a fillbuster for some Ds were in red states and were fearing the 2010 or other elections.)

Yadda, Yadda, Yadda / Blah, Blah, Blah. This is the issue where the various veto points in the US system cause legislation to die and the issue seems eternal / timeless even though were the issue dies in each congress may be different at a different veto point over the last 18 years.