Judge Blocks California Deepfakes Law For Violating First Amendment

A federal judge has blocked a new California law that would’ve allowed any person to file a lawsuit seeking damages suffered as a result of election deepfake content. 

The judge, U.S. District Judge John Mendez, granted a preliminary injunction on Wednesday that at least temporarily blocks the law from going into effect.

In his ruling, Mendez wrote that while he believes there are significant risks that both deepfakes and artificial intelligence poses, he also believed that the law likely would be in violation of the First Amendment.

As he wrote:

“Most of AB 2839 acts as a hammer instead of a scalpel, serving as a blunt tool that hinders humorous expression and unconstitutionally stifles the free and unfettered exchange of ideas which is so vital to American democratic debate.”

When Democratic Governor Gavin Newsom signed the law back in September, it immediately took effect. 

At the same time that bill was signed, Newsom also signed two others that both aimed to crack down on how people use AI to create fake videos or images for political ads as the 2024 election draws nearer.

They are considered some of the toughest laws in the nation of that kind.

Newsom spokesperson Izzy Gardon defended the laws this week, saying they work to preserve free speech and protect democracy. As he said in a statement:

“We’re confident the courts will uphold the state’s ability to regulate these types of dangerous and misleading deepfakes. Satire remains alive and well in California — even for those who miss the punchline.”

Christopher Kohls is a YouTuber who brought one of the first challenges to the law immediately after it was passed. The lawyer who is representing him in the case, Theodore Frank, said that the ruling from the judge was “straightforward.”

As Frank said:

“We are gratified that the district court agreed with our analysis that new technologies do not change the principles behind First Amendment protections.”

Many experts on the First Amendment weren’t pleased with the law. They urged the California governor to veto it before he ultimately signed it. What they argue is that it’s an overreach by the government as well as unconstitutional.

In September, the legal director of the First Amendment Coalition, David Loy, gave an interview in which he said:

“If something is truly defamatory, there’s a whole body of law and established legal standards for how to prove a claim for defamation consistent with the First Amendment. The government is not free to create new categories of speech outside the First Amendment.”

Newsom has vowed for a few months now to crackdown on deepfakes created around politics and the upcoming election after Elon Musk, the owner of the social media platform X, published a post that featured images of Democratic presidential nominee Kamala Harris that were altered.

Musk didn’t accompany that post with any warning or notice that the post was a parody or that the images weren’t real.