AI-generated image laws by state
AI Laws USA tracks 123 U.S. AI rules on AI-generated images across federal, state, county, and city government. Each entry links to its official source.
Federal AI-generated images rules (4)
-
In effect
TAKE IT DOWN Act
United States · Effective May 19, 2025 · Pub. L. No. 119-12 (S. 146)
Makes it a federal crime to knowingly publish intimate images of someone without consent, including AI-generated deepfakes. Social media and similar platforms must give victims a way to request removal and must take the content (and known copies) down within 48 hours. The platform removal requirement became enforceable May 19, 2026, and the FTC has already begun enforcement.
-
Blocked / in litigation
Young v. NeoCortext (Reface)
C.D. Cal. · Effective April 3, 2023 · Young v. NeoCortext, Inc., No. 2:23-cv-02496 (C.D. Cal.); 9th Cir. Dec. 2024
Reality TV personality Kyland Young sued NeoCortext (developer of the Reface face-swap app) under California's right-of-publicity statute, alleging Reface used his image in its in-app catalog without consent. In 2024 the Ninth Circuit affirmed denial of NeoCortext's anti-SLAPP motion, allowing the case to proceed.
-
In effect
Copyright Office AI Guidance
United States · 17 U.S.C. § 102; U.S. Copyright Office, Copyright and AI Reports (2024–2025)
The U.S. Copyright Office has ruled that purely AI-generated works cannot be copyrighted — human creativity is required, and typing prompts alone is not enough. Its multi-part AI report covers digital replicas (2024), copyrightability of AI outputs (Jan 2025), and AI training on copyrighted works (May 2025 pre-publication). Whether AI training is fair use is being decided in ongoing litigation.
-
Proposed / pending
DEFIANCE Act (deepfake-porn civil suits)
United States · S. 1837, 119th Cong. (DEFIANCE Act)
This bill would let victims of sexually explicit AI deepfakes sue the people who create or share them, with damages starting around $150,000. The Senate passed it unanimously on January 13, 2026 — the second time it has done so — but as of June 2026 it is still awaiting action in the House and is not yet law.
State AI-generated images rules (119)
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
California SB 1111 (AI digital replicas covered by likeness law and impersonation crimes)
California · Effective January 1, 2027 · SB 1111 (Ashby), Stats. 2026, ch. 862; Cal. Civ. Code § 3344; Cal. Penal Code § 540
Makes clear that California's right-of-publicity law covers AI digital replicas: using a realistic AI copy of a living person's voice or likeness to advertise or sell something without consent is treated the same as using their real voice or image. It also makes using a digital replica to impersonate someone count as false impersonation under existing criminal laws.
-
In effect
PR Ley 163-2026 / P. del S. 441 (Image Rights)
Puerto Rico · Effective August 3, 2026 · Ley 163-2026 (P. del S. 441, 19th Leg. Assembly); signed August 3, 2026
Puerto Rico Law 163-2026 (P. del S. 441) expands the island's right-of-image statute (Law 139-2011) to expressly cover AI-generated deepfakes and voice clones. Creates civil causes of action when someone's appearance, voice, gestures, movements, or other identifiable attributes are synthetically generated, cloned, simulated, or altered without consent. Signed by Governor Jenniffer González Colón on August 3, 2026.
-
In effect
Illinois HB 3851 — deepfake cyberbullying in schools (2026)
Illinois · Effective July 1, 2026 · Ill. H.B. 3851, 104th Gen. Assemb. (eff. July 1, 2026) (amending the Ill. School Code)
Illinois has written AI deepfakes into the part of the School Code that governs bullying. Under House Bill 3851, signed in August 2025 and effective July 1, 2026, the statutory definition of 'cyber-bullying' now includes posting or distributing an unauthorized digital replica of a student by electronic means. A digital replica means an AI-generated or electronically altered representation of a person's voice, image or likeness; it is unauthorized when the depicted person did not consent. The law also makes explicit that bullying includes posting or distributing sexually explicit images. The practical effect is jurisdictional: school districts can now act on deepfake incidents under their bullying policies, rather than being left to argue about whether an AI-generated image of a student counts as bullying at all. The change applies from the 2026-2027 school year, and districts across Illinois had to update their policies and procedures to match. Alongside it, the Illinois State Board of Education was required to develop statewide guidance on artificial intelligence in schools by July 1, 2026, expected to cover AI-generated false representations of individuals. The problem is not hypothetical: a 2024 Center for Democracy & Technology survey found 40% of K-12 public school students knew of a deepfake involving someone at their school, and 15% knew of a sexually explicit deepfake depicting a member of their school community, while more than 60% of teachers said their school had not shared any policy on AI-generated sexual imagery.
-
In effect
Montana HB 513 (property right in voice & likeness vs. deepfakes)
Montana · Effective January 1, 2026 · Mont. HB 513 (2025) (Ch. 685); codified in Title 30, ch. 14, MCA
Montana gives individuals a property right in their name, voice, and visual likeness. A person may be sued for damages if, without consent, they intentionally publish, perform, distribute, or make available to the public a digital voice or visual depiction of an individual for commercial use, knowing it is an unauthorized depiction of that person. The same liability applies to distributing tools whose primary purpose is producing such unauthorized digital depictions. The right lasts 20 years after death, with exceptions for news, commentary, and parody.
-
In effect
New York S8391 (bans unauthorized AI digital replicas of deceased performers)
New York · Effective December 11, 2025 · N.Y. Civ. Rights Law § 50-f; L. 2025, ch. 616 (S8391/A8882)
This law makes it illegal to use a digital replica of a deceased performer in an audiovisual work, a sound recording, or a live performance of a musical work without consent from the appropriate rights holder. It applies when the user knows the replica is unauthorized. A deceased performer's estate or rights holder can sue, recovering the greater of $2,000 or their actual damages, plus any profits the violator made from the unauthorized use.
-
In effect
Cherokee Nation AI Policy
Cherokee Nation (OK) · Effective August 21, 2025 · Cherokee Nation IT AI Policy (Aug. 21, 2025); companion to Cherokee Nation EO 2024-07-CTH
Cherokee Nation's first AI policy. Governs responsible and ethical AI use across tribal government, protects Cherokee language and cultural content, and requires AI vendor questionnaires before deployment in tribal systems. Signed by Principal Chief Chuck Hoskin Jr.
-
In effect
New York Fashion Workers Act (models must consent to AI digital replicas)
New York · Effective June 19, 2025 · New York State Fashion Workers Act; L. 2024, ch. 683 (S9832)
Before a modeling agency or a client can create or use an AI digital replica of a model (such as a computer-generated version of their face, body, or voice), they must get the model's clear written consent, separate from the regular representation contract, that spells out the scope, purpose, pay, and how long the replica will be used.
-
In effect
Utah S.B. 271 (no AI deepfakes of your identity for commercial use without consent)
Utah · Effective May 7, 2025 · Utah Laws 2025, S.B. 271; Utah Code 45-3-2 to 45-3-7
Utah broadened its abuse-of-personal-identity law to cover AI-generated and other artificial recreations of a person's identity. 'Personal identity' now includes a person's video likeness, voice, and audiovisual appearance, plus any simulation or artificial recreation made through generative AI, computer animation, or digital manipulation. It is unlawful to use someone's personal identity this way for commercial purposes without consent, and to knowingly distribute, sell, or license technology whose primary purpose is unauthorized identity-content creation. Exemptions cover news, art, and parody.
-
In effect
IL Digital Voice/Likeness Act
IL · Effective January 1, 2025 · 765 ILCS 1075/; P.A. 103-1014
Illinois created a private right of action against anyone who distributes an unauthorized AI 'digital replica' of a person's voice or likeness, with damages up to $150,000 plus attorneys' fees. Aimed at AI voice-clone fraud, fake celebrity endorsements, and unauthorized digital replicas of performers.
-
In effect
California AB 1836 (bans unauthorized AI digital replicas of dead performers)
California · Effective January 1, 2025 · Cal. Civ. Code § 3344.1 (AB 1836, Stats. 2024, ch. 258)
It is unlawful to produce, distribute, or make available a digital replica of a deceased celebrity's or performer's voice or likeness in a film, video, or sound recording without consent from whoever controls that person's rights (such as their estate). Anyone who does so is liable to the rights holder for the greater of $10,000 or the actual damages caused.
-
In effect
NY AI digital replica law
NY · Effective August 13, 2024 · N.Y. Civil Rights Law §§ 50-f, 50-g; Ch. 219 and 220 of 2024
New York governor signed laws making vague AI digital-replica clauses in personal-services contracts unenforceable and reinforcing the state's right-of-publicity protections for AI-generated voice and likeness fraud. Builds on NY's existing Civil Rights Law §§ 50-f and 50-g.
-
In effect
ELVIS Act
Tennessee · Effective July 1, 2024 · Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 47-25-1101 to -1108 (ELVIS Act, 2024)
The first US law protecting voices from AI cloning: Tennessee added 'voice' to its right-of-publicity law, so using AI to mimic someone's voice or likeness without permission is both a civil violation and a crime. It also allows lawsuits against those who distribute tools whose primary purpose is producing unauthorized voice or likeness replicas.
-
In effect
NY S5959-D (2020, digital replicas + deepfake porn)
NY · Effective May 29, 2021 · Ch. 304 of 2020 (S5959-D); N.Y. Civ. Rights Law §§ 50-f, 52-c
Signed by Governor Cuomo on November 30, 2020, NY S5959-D was the first state law to (1) extend right of publicity to digital replicas of deceased personalities for 40 years, and (2) create a private right of action against unlawful publication of sexually explicit deepfakes. Landmark precedent — direct ancestor of CA AB 1836 (2024) and NY's 2023-2025 digital-replica laws.
-
In effect
Plateau Peoples TK/BC Labels
Plateau Peoples' Web Portal (Multi-Tribal) · Effective January 1, 2015 · Plateau Peoples' Web Portal — multi-tribal TK/BC Labels initiative
Six Plateau tribes — Colville, Umatilla, Warm Springs, Yakama, Spokane, and Coeur d'Alene — jointly implement Local Contexts Traditional Knowledge and Biocultural Labels on digital cultural-heritage collections. A working Indigenous data sovereignty mechanism applicable to AI training data: labels travel with the data and assert community-defined access and use rules.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
HB 1170 (WA AI Content Disclosure)
Washington · Effective February 1, 2027 · Wash. E2SHB 1170 (2026); Ch. 167, 2026 Laws
Large AI image, video, and audio generators must embed hard-to-remove provenance data — watermarks or tamper-resistant metadata — in the synthetic content they create, where commercially and technically reasonable. This lets journalists, courts, and the public identify AI-generated media. Applies to generative AI services with over 1 million monthly users that are available to Washington consumers. Enforced only by the Washington Attorney General under the Consumer Protection Act. Effective February 1, 2027.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Utah HB 276 Provenance Act (AI-content labels + platform provenance duties)
Utah · Effective January 1, 2027 · Utah Code 13-72c-101 to -301, 63A-16-215 (H.B. 276, 2026)
This part of Utah's AI Modifications law requires large generative-AI providers to embed a hidden (latent) disclosure in AI-generated or substantially AI-altered image, audio, and video content. Large online platforms must detect provenance data, let users inspect it, and must not strip compliant provenance or digital signatures. From January 1, 2028, capture-device makers must embed a latent disclosure by default. The law also directs the state CIO to set provenance standards for digital content on public-facing state-agency webpages.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Utah HB 276 Voyeurism Act (AI counterfeit intimate images / NCII)
Utah · Effective January 1, 2027 · Utah Code 13-72b-101 to -401 (H.B. 276, 2026)
This part of Utah's AI Modifications law targets AI-generated counterfeit intimate images. An online 'generation service' that lets users create images and then distributes a counterfeit intimate image of an identifiable person without consent violates that person's privacy. Generation services must warn users and get a safe harbor with a written policy and safeguards. Platforms that host content may not knowingly allow distribution of nonconsensual counterfeit intimate images and must run notice-and-takedown procedures aligned with the federal Take It Down Act (48-hour removal). Victims can sue for injunctions, actual and punitive damages, and attorney fees.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Wisconsin 452.136(1m) (real estate ads must disclose AI-altered property images)
Wisconsin · Effective January 1, 2027 · Wis. Stat. 452.136(1m); 2025 Wis. Act 69
Wisconsin will require licensed real estate professionals to disclose in their advertising whenever an ad has been altered or modified using technology, including AI, to add, remove, or change elements of a property in a way that creates a false or misleading impression. The rule targets AI-edited listing photos that could mislead buyers or renters. It takes effect January 1, 2027.
-
In effect
SB 942 (AI Transparency Act)
California · Effective August 2, 2026 · Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757 et seq. (SB 942, as amended by AB 853)
Large generative AI providers (over 1 million monthly users) must offer a free AI-detection tool and embed disclosures in AI-generated images, video, and audio, including hidden watermark-style disclosures. A 2025 amendment (AB 853) delayed the start to August 2, 2026 and extended duties to large online platforms (from January 1, 2027) and camera and other capture-device makers (from January 1, 2028).
-
In effect
KS Synthetic CSAM Law
Kansas · Effective July 1, 2026 · KS HB 2183, 2025-26 Reg. Sess., approved by Governor Feb. 5, 2026, eff. July 1, 2026
Kansas updated its child sexual exploitation and privacy statutes to prohibit creation and distribution of visual depictions where the person depicted is indistinguishable from a real child, including AI-generated and morphed imagery. The law also addresses unlawful transmission of such visual depictions and breach of privacy. Signed by the governor February 5, 2026; took effect July 1, 2026 as part of the 124-law Kansas effective date batch.
-
In effect
Wyo. Stat. 6-4-308 (felony to build/distribute AI systems made to create child porn)
Wyoming · Effective July 1, 2026 · Wyo. Stat. Ann. 6-4-308; see also 6-4-303(b); 2026 Wyo. Sess. Laws (HB0102 / HEA 32)
This new Wyoming crime targets AI systems built specifically to generate child sexual abuse material. It is a felony to knowingly develop or distribute an AI system designed to create, distribute, or promote child pornography or synthetic sexual material, when done with intent or knowledge that others will use it that way. General-purpose tools that produce such content only from user prompts, and bona fide educational, library, law enforcement, and platform activity, are exempted. A companion amendment to 6-4-303 also makes using AI to generate child pornography, or possessing AI-generated child pornography, a felony.
-
In effect
New York S8420A (ads must disclose AI 'synthetic performers')
New York · Effective June 9, 2026 · N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law 396-b (S8420A, 2025)
When a business creates an advertisement for property or services for a commercial purpose, this law requires it to clearly disclose if the ad uses a 'synthetic performer' — a digitally created asset (made with generative AI or a software algorithm) meant to look like an audiovisual or visual performance by a human, where the figure is not recognizable as any identifiable real person. Penalties are $1,000 for a first violation and $5,000 for each subsequent violation.
-
In effect
Kansas HB 2479 (AI images in blackmail law)
Kansas · Effective April 9, 2026 · 2026 Kan. HB 2479, amending K.S.A. 21-5428 (blackmail)
Kansas's blackmail law now expressly covers threats to release a nude or sexual image, video, or recording of an identifiable person even when that depiction was made or altered by artificial intelligence. It applies whether or not the person was involved in producing any original image, so threatening someone with an AI-generated 'deepfake' of them can be prosecuted as blackmail. Existing criminal penalties for blackmail apply.
-
In effect
Kansas HB 2537 'Caleb's Law' (AI sextortion)
Kansas · Effective April 6, 2026 · 2026 Kan. HB 2537 ('Caleb's Law'), amending K.S.A. 21-5515 (sexual extortion)
Kansas's sexual-extortion statute now defines the covered 'image, video, or other recording' to include any depiction created, altered, or modified by artificial intelligence to appear to show a person, whether or not that person was part of any original recording. This means demands or threats backed by AI-fabricated sexual imagery fall within the crime of sexual extortion. The same act, known as 'Caleb's Law,' also raises penalties when an adult offender targets a victim under 18 or a dependent adult and creates aggravated sexual-extortion offenses.
-
In effect
Vermont Election Deepfake Law
Vermont · Effective March 5, 2026 · 2026 VT Acts No. 75 (S.23)
Deceptive AI-generated images, audio, or video about Vermont candidates distributed within 90 days of an election must carry a clear disclosure: on video for the full duration, in audio at the beginning, end, and at least every two minutes. Fines run up to $1,000, rising to as much as $15,000 for repeat violations meant to cause violence or harm, and the candidate depicted can go to court to stop distribution.
-
In effect
California AB 723 (real estate ads must disclose AI-altered images)
California · Effective January 1, 2026 · Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 10140.8 (AB 723, 2025)
This law targets misleading property listings that use AI or other digital editing to alter images. A real estate licensee who uses a digitally altered image (including AI-altered images) in advertising to sell real property must disclose that the image was altered and provide a link, URL, or QR code to the original unaltered image. Routine adjustments like lighting, cropping, and color correction are excluded.
-
In effect
OK AI Revenge Porn Law
Oklahoma · Effective November 1, 2025 · Okla. HB 1364, 60th Leg., 1st Sess. (2025), eff. Nov. 1, 2025
Oklahoma makes it a crime to knowingly or recklessly share AI-generated sexually explicit images of another person without their consent and with intent to cause harm. Violations can be charged as a misdemeanor or felony depending on circumstances. Exceptions exist for journalism, law enforcement, and platform liability is limited.
-
In effect
NV NCII Deepfake Law
Nevada · Effective October 1, 2025 · 2025 Nev. Stat. (SB 213); NRS 200.780
Nevada expanded its intimate-images law to explicitly cover AI-generated and digitally manipulated images — anything that could reasonably be mistaken for a real depiction of the person, whether or not their actual image was used. Knowing distribution is a Category D felony (1–4 years).
-
In effect
Montana HB 514 (sextortion deepfakes in privacy crime)
Montana · Effective October 1, 2025 · Mont. HB 514 (2025) (Ch. 686); MCA 45-8-213
Montana expanded its existing 'privacy in communications' crime to cover real or AI-fabricated sexual images. It is now an offense to publish or distribute such images of an identifiable person without consent to harass or harm them or to obtain money, and separately to possess such images and threaten to release them to extort money or other valuables.
-
In effect
Ohio AI Fabricated Sexual Images Law
Ohio · Effective September 30, 2025 · ORC § 2917.211 (amended by 2025 Ohio HB 96); ORC § 2307.66
Ohio amended its nonconsensual-image law in September 2025 to expressly cover AI-generated and digitally fabricated sexual images — prohibiting both distributing AND creating them without the depicted person's consent. First offenses are fourth-degree felonies, escalating for repeat offenders. Victims may sue for compensatory and punitive damages plus attorney's fees.
- 89 more
- AZ Synthetic Intimate Images Law (SB1462) · Arizona · In effect
- ME AI Private Images Law · Maine · In effect
- PA Digital Forgery Law · Pennsylvania · In effect
- Nebraska LB 383 (AI/computer-generated CSAM) · Nebraska · In effect
- TX SB 1621 — AI CSAM Rewrite · Texas · In effect
- TX SB 20 — Obscene Material Depicting a Child · Texas · In effect
- TX HB 581 — AI Sexual Material Age Verification · Texas · In effect
- Texas SB 441 (deepfake NCII crime + website/AI-app/payment-processor liability) · Texas · In effect
- Michigan Intimate Deep Fakes Act · Michigan · In effect
- ND Sexually Explicit Deepfake Law · North Dakota · In effect
- Minnesota HF 2432 (AI-generated CSAM) · Minnesota · In effect
- ND HB 1386 (CSAM laws cover computer-generated/AI images of minors) · North Dakota · In effect
- West Virginia SB 198 (criminalizes AI/computer-generated child pornography) · West Virginia · In effect
- RI Synthetic Intimate Imagery Law · Rhode Island · In effect
- SD Election Deepfake Law · South Dakota · In effect
- MD NCII Deepfake Law · Maryland · In effect
- NE Synthetic NCII Civil Remedy · Nebraska · In effect
- SC AI CSAM / Deepfake Laws · South Carolina · In effect
- Montana SB 413 (crime to share explicit deepfakes) · Montana · In effect
- Arkansas AI CSAM Law · Arkansas · In effect
- Arkansas Deepfake Sexual Content Act · Arkansas · In effect
- NJ Deceptive AI Deepfakes Act · New Jersey · In effect
- NH Deepfake Law (HB 1432) · New Hampshire · In effect
- California SB 981 (platforms must let users report & remove deepfake nudes) · California · In effect
- California SB 926 (crime to create & share realistic fake nudes of real people) · California · In effect
- California AB 1831 (CSAM laws now cover AI-generated/altered material) · California · In effect
- PA Deepfake/CSAM Law (Act 125) · Pennsylvania · In effect
- NC HB 591 (AI CSAM, deepfake intimate images & sextortion) · North Carolina · In effect
- Oklahoma HB 3642 (AI-generated CSAM is a crime) · Oklahoma · In effect
- NY AG · NY · In effect
- Delaware Election Deepfake Law · Delaware · In effect
- Alabama Synthetic Private Images Law · Alabama · In effect
- Alabama Election Deepfake Law · Alabama · In effect
- Alabama Child Protection Act (AI-generated CSAM) · Alabama · In effect
- MA Digitized Intimate-Images Law (deepfake NCII) · Massachusetts · In effect
- NH Election Deepfake Law · New Hampshire · In effect
- Louisiana AI Intimate-Image Law (R.S. 14:73.14) · Louisiana · In effect
- Kentucky HB 207 (computer-generated CSAM) · Kentucky · In effect
- Iowa Synthetic Intimate Content Law · Iowa · In effect
- Iowa AI CSAM Law · Iowa · In effect
- MS Deepfake Law · Mississippi · In effect
- ID Synthetic NCII Law · Idaho · In effect
- WY NCII Deepfake Law · Wyoming · In effect
- Vermont NCII Deepfake Law · Vermont · In effect
- IN NCII Deepfake Law · Indiana · In effect
- Florida Generated CSAM Law (AI-generated) · Florida · In effect
- GA SB 466 (no 'it's AI' defense for CSAM) · Georgia · In effect
- Tennessee HB 2163 (AI-generated child abuse images are illegal 'material') · Tennessee · In effect
- Virginia SB 731 (AI/computer-generated CSAM covered) · Virginia · In effect
- HB 919 (AI Political Ad Disclaimers) · Florida · In effect
- Washington HB 1999 (criminalizes AI/fabricated CSAM and nonconsensual fake intimate images) · Washington · In effect
- AZ Election Deepfake Disclosure Law · Arizona · In effect
- AZ Digital Impersonation Law · Arizona · In effect
- New Mexico Political Deepfake Law · New Mexico · In effect
- Utah H.B. 148 (computer-generated CSAM & intimate images count as illegal) · Utah · In effect
- Utah H.B. 238 (AI-generated child sexual abuse material is illegal) · Utah · In effect
- New York AIDPA (privacy right covers AI-made likeness & voice) · New York · In effect
- WI AI CSAM Law · Wisconsin · In effect
- ID FAIR Elections Act · Idaho · In effect
- MI SOS Deepfake Election Policy · MI · In effect
- Michigan Election Deepfake Law · Michigan · In effect
- SD AI CSAM Law · South Dakota · In effect
- New York S1042A (bans sharing deepfake intimate images) · New York · In effect
- Maryland CSAM Law (computer-generated images) · Maryland · In effect
- TX HB 2700 — AI/Altered CSAM · Texas · In effect
- TX SB 1361 — Deepfake Intimate Video · Texas · In effect
- MN Deepfake Law · Minnesota · In effect
- LA Unlawful Deepfakes Law · Louisiana · In effect
- SB 5152 (Election Synthetic Media) · Washington · In effect
- GA Synthetic NCII Transmission Law · Georgia · In effect
- Wyo. Stat. 6-4-306 (revenge-porn law covers computer-generated images) · Wyoming · In effect
- HI SB 309 (deepfake intimate-image crime) · Hawaii · In effect
- AB 602 (Deepfake Intimate Images) · California · In effect
- Virginia HB 2678 (deepfake nude/explicit images become a crime) · Virginia · In effect
- Missouri RSMo 573.010 (computer-generated CSAM) · Missouri · In effect
- Wyo. Stat. 6-4-303 (child-porn definition covers computer-generated images) · Wyoming · In effect
- Montana SB 25 election deepfakes — preliminarily enjoined as to plaintiff (2026) · Montana · In effect
- Hawaii Election Deepfake Law (blocked) · Hawaii · Blocked / in litigation
- WV Fabricated Intimate Images Law · West Virginia · In effect
- NJ S4701 GAI Accountability Act · New Jersey · Proposed / pending
- Missouri Deepfake & Digital Media Protection Act · Missouri · Proposed / pending
- Massachusetts AI-CSAM Criminalization Act (Senate) · Massachusetts · Proposed / pending
- Massachusetts AI-CSAM Criminalization Act (House) · Massachusetts · Proposed / pending
- New York Deepfake Harassment and NCII Civil Action Act · New York · Proposed / pending
- New York Deepfake Harassment and NCII Civil Action Act (Assembly) · New York · Proposed / pending
- North Carolina AI Regulatory Reform Act (Deepfake/NCII Provisions) · North Carolina · Proposed / pending
- CA AB 3211 (died) · CA · Expired
- Missouri Taylor Swift Act (SB 1117) · Missouri · Expired
- Alaska AI-CSAM and Deepfake Criminalization Act · Alaska · Expired