A federal judge has issued a preliminary injunction blocking enforcement of a recently passed California law aimed at curbing the spread of AI-generated deepfakes depicting political candidates. “While well-founded fears of a digitally manipulated media environment may be justified, this fear has given lawmakers the opportunity to engage in criticism, parody, and , does not give license to unrestricted interference with the long-standing tradition of satire.” First Amendment. ”
tech crunch report Just two weeks after Governor Gavin Newsom signed it, a key provision of California AB 2839 targeting AI deepfakes has been put on hold by a federal court. The law would allow California judges to order individuals who spread deepfakes of politicians to take them down or, in some cases, determine that the fakes could mislead voters. gives the power to impose penalties.
In a ruling issued this week, U.S. District Judge John Mendez sided with plaintiff Christopher Coles, who posted an AI-generated deepfake video depicting Vice President Kamala Harris. Coles filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of AB 2839, arguing that Harris' fake video is protected as political satire under the First Amendment.
In his decision, Judge Mendez expressed concern that the California law's language was overly broad and subjective, potentially encompassing “vast amounts of political and constitutionally protected speech.” . He noted that while there may be legitimate concerns that manipulated digital content could undermine elections, it does not give lawmakers the freedom to restrict speech traditionally protected by the First Amendment. .
“While the well-founded fear of a digitally manipulated media environment may be justified, this fear has prompted legislators to embrace the long tradition of criticism, parody, and satire protected by the First Amendment. YouTube videos, Facebook posts, and X-tweets are today's newspaper ads and political satire, and the First Amendment does not give permission for these criticisms to be made in any new medium. We protect an individual's right to speak, regardless of the person's decision,” Mendez said in the ruling. He said other legal tools such as privacy law, copyright law and defamation law already provide redress for people whose reputations may have been damaged by altered depictions online. pointed out.
The preliminary injunction will prevent California Attorney General Rob Bonta from enforcing AB 2839's deepfake takedown provisions against Kohl's and other online speakers, except for fraudulent audio content. While acknowledging that the state has a strong interest in maintaining election integrity, Mendez said he is concerned about the First Amendment violations experienced by Coles and other content creators under the law. We judged that the possibility and the effect of dampening speech were more important.
Breitbart News previously reported that free speech advocacy group FIRE strongly opposes California's law.
California's new law targeting “deceptive” political content threatens satire, parody and other speech protected by the First Amendment.
AB 2839 prohibits the sharing of “deceptively” digitally modified content about candidates for public office for any purpose. This means that sharing such content to criticize it or call it out as fake may be against the law.
The law also requires comedians to label satire and parody, such as requiring comedians to preface every joke with an announcement that they are telling a joke. That's not funny, it's terrifying.
Whatever concerns you have about AI-generated expressions, violating the First Amendment is not the way to address them.
read more Click here for TechCrunch.
Lucas Nolan is a reporter for Breitbart News covering free speech and online censorship issues.
