bbieron@platformeconomyinsights.com

Judge Rules that Montana Political Deepfake Law is Likely Unconstitutional

Oct 3, 2026

Report from NBC Montana
In Brief – US District Judge Susan Watters has ruled that a Montana law requiring disclosures on certain AI-generated political ads likely violates the First Amendment in an order barring the state from enforcing the measure against former state lawmaker Dan Bartel and his political action committee. The law applies to AI-generated ads depicting a candidate or political party with the intent to damage their reputation or deceive voters. Within 60 days of an election, such ads are prohibited unless they carry a disclosure saying the material was made or significantly edited by AI. The law, which imposes civil and criminal penalties, exempts satire and parody, although it does not define those terms. Judge Watters said the statute likely violates the First Amendment because it discriminates based on both content and viewpoint, including that government officials are required to examine the substance of political material and noted that the restrictions target speech considered “injurious rather than uplifting.” Bartel sued after complaints were filed over mailers that included AI-generated images. Although the complaints were dismissed by regulators as satire or parody, Watters nevertheless granted an injunction.

Context – Election “disinformation” and non-consensual pornography are the two most cited potential harms from so-called AI “deepfakes”. More than 25 states have enacted laws against election deepfakes, but federal judges have been very skeptical of their ability to withstand First Amendment scrutiny. None of the other state laws have been enforced against a violator, and the laws in California, Hawaii and now Montana have been blocked in some fashion. On the other hand, Minnesota laws targeting election deepfakes and sexual deepfakes have withstood initial court challenges, although primarily on technical grounds of plaintiffs lacking standing. In Europe, AI “transparency” rules are part of the EU’s AI Act regulatory regime. Corporate requirements include clearly disclosing when users are interacting with AI services and chatbots, or viewing AI-generated or manipulated images, audio and video.

View By Monthly
Latest Blog
Snap Settles Latest Social Media Addiction Teen Bellwether Lawsuit

Report from The Hill In Brief – Snapchat has settled claims from two teen plaintiffs alleging that the platform was intentionally designed to be addictive to young users, ending a high-profile Los Angeles trial two days before opening arguments. The plaintiffs, from...

EU Commission Wants Frontex to Monitor Online Immigration Content

Report from The Next Web In Brief – The European Commission has proposed giving Frontex, the EU’s border agency, authority to monitor social media posts about migration and flag problematic content. The proposal, included in a broader Frontex overhaul, would establish...

DC Attorney General Joins Thirteen States Suing TikTok Over Safety

Report from Fox 5 In Brief – The District of Columbia has joined the litigation efforts of 13 states suing TikTok, accusing the social media platform of harming children through intentionally addictive design, deceptive claims about user safety, and other violations...

Social Media Giants Lose Challenge Against Ofcom Information Demands

Report from Courthouse News In Brief – The High Court in London has rejected legal challenges by Meta, TikTok and X against demands from Britain’s online safety regulator, Ofcom, for information about how the platforms moderate harmful content. The ruling backs the...

Platform Economy Insights produces a short email four times a week that reviews two top stories with concise analysis. It is the best way to keep on top of the news you should know. Sign up for this free email here.

* indicates required