Gavin Newson’s Anti-Meme Laws Hit with Legal Challenges in Federal Court

35
Gavin Newson’s Anti-Meme Laws Hit with Legal Challenges in Federal Court

Democrat Governor Gavin Newsom’s new laws to outlaw online memes and “deepfake” content have been met with legal challenges in federal court.

Newsom signed legislation into state law that would make it a crime to share content generated by artificial intelligence (AI) on social media.

The law demands that social media companies remove content that Democrats deem “deceptive.”

According to Newsom’s office, the new laws build on legislation passed years earlier regulating campaign ads and communications.

However, two of the three new laws are being challenged in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California.

The challenge was launched by a conservative X user @MrReaganUSA.

The account had posted an AI-generated parody of a Harris campaign ad.

The video resurfaced and went viral after Newsom signed the bills.

The Hamilton Lincoln Law Institute, a public interest firm, filed the lawsuit on behalf of @MrReaganUSA.

“This chills free speech, particularly for political commentators like Mr. Reagan, who use satire to critique public figures and rely on social media viewership for their livelihood,” the law firm said in a news release.

Newsom’s office insists that the laws will not ban memes or parodies.

The governor argues that legislation will instead require all satire or parody content to either remove their content or display a disclaimer label that the content is digitally altered.

One of the laws also exempts “Materially deceptive content that constitutes satire or parody.”

Yet, the laws will require social media companies to remove content at the request of the Democrat state officials.

The attorney for the account holder suing California, Theodore Frank, warns that there’s a provision in one of the laws that would require social media platforms to have “a large censorship apparatus and respond to complaints within 36 hours.”

“And what’s going to happen is that social media is just going to ban us so that they don’t have to have a big infrastructure to deal with it,” Frank said.

“They’re not going to look to see whether something counts as parody.”

“There’s a provision that allows lawsuits against the makers of the videos, if, unless there are these really burdensome disclosure requirements that basically require you to use the entire screen to have the disclosure and requires them to take down years of videos and spend hours on hours re-cutting them with the disclosure requirements and then having a disclosure that’s louder than the video itself, and that takes away the entire comedic event,” Frank added.

The law makes it illegal to create and publish deepfakes ahead of Election Day and 60 days thereafter.

It also allows courts to stop the distribution of the materials and impose civil penalties, per the Associated Press.

X allows parody accounts so long as they distinguish themselves as such “in their account name and in their bio,” per the company’s website.

The platform does not have rules around individual posts containing parody and has been known to label deepfakes if the poster does not do so.

There are similar laws already in place in Alabama, and Frank said they’re prepared to file suit against those, too.

“I don’t think Republicans are immune to over-legislating in this area, but there are certainly other states that are doing this,” he said.

“And you know, I think it depends on who’s in power and who’s getting made fun of.”

In a statement, Newsom spokesperson Izzy Gardon said:

“The person who created this misleading deepfake in the middle of an election already labeled the post as a parody on X.

“Requiring them to use the word ‘parody’ on the actual video avoids further misleading the public as the video is shared across the platform.

“It’s unclear why this conservative activist is suing California,” Gardon said.

“This new disclosure law for election misinformation isn’t any more onerous than laws already passed in other states, including Alabama.

“We’re proud California did expand the law to also include misinformation about election workers for two months after an election — so that malicious actors don’t attempt to disrupt the democratic process.”

Newsom has previously condemned such satirical election content generated by AI.

In response to the altered election ad of Harris, which Elon Musk reposted, Newsom said in July:

“Manipulating a voice in an ‘ad’ like this one should be illegal.

“I’ll be signing a bill in a matter of weeks to make sure it is.”

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR