PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Mar 6, 2025
Preventing Deepfakes of Intimate Images Act
This bill makes it a crime to intentionally disclose (or threaten to disclose) a digital depiction that has been altered using digital manipulation of an individual engaging in sexually explicit conduct.
People & committees
Rep. Morelle, Joseph D. [D-NY-25] · D–NY
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We also preserved the text version used in the PlainBill explanation below.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Oct 2, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1941 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1941 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1941 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1941 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.
PlainBill explanation
Based on the full Introduced in House · 2025-03-06 text. This explanation has not received human editorial review. This overview describes the proposal’s major provisions; it does not establish what its real-world effects would be.
The proposed Preventing Deepfakes of Intimate Images Act would give identifiable people a federal civil remedy when digitally created or altered intimate images of them are disclosed without consent, subject to specified conditions and exceptions. It would also criminalize disclosures or threats involving specified harmful intentions or knowledge of likely harm. People bringing civil cases could seek money and court orders stopping disclosure. These are proposed changes; the supplied history records introduction and committee referral.
This Act may be cited as the Preventing Deepfakes of Intimate Images Act.
Except as provided in subsection (e), an individual who is the subject of an intimate digital depiction that is disclosed, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce, without the consent of the individual, where such disclosure was made by a person who knows that, or recklessly disregards whether, the individual has not consented to such disclosure, may bring a civil action against that person in an appropriate district court of the United States for relief as set forth in subsection (d).
a court may, in addition to any other relief available at law, order equitable relief, including a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, or a permanent injunction ordering the defendant to cease display or disclosure of the intimate digital depiction.
Whoever, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, discloses or threatens to disclose an intimate digital depiction— (1) with the intent to harass, annoy, threaten, alarm, or cause substantial harm to the finances or reputation of the depicted individual; or (2) with actual knowledge that, or reckless disregard for whether, such disclosure or threatened disclosure will cause physical, emotional, reputational, or economic harm to the depicted individual, shall be punished as provided under subsection (b).
In a civil action filed under this section, an individual may recover any of the following:
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-02T08:06:19Z. 2025-03-06: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2025-03-06: Introduced in House
Section 2 would add a civil remedy to the Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization Act of 2022. Coverage would require a realistic visual depiction created or altered digitally and a person identifiable through their appearance, another distinguishing feature, or accompanying information.
The Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization Act of 2022 is amended by inserting after section 1309 the following: 1309A. Disclosure of intimate digital depictions
The term depicted individual means an individual who, as a result of digitization or by means of digital manipulation, appears in whole or in part in an intimate digital depiction and who is identifiable by virtue of the person’s face, likeness, or other distinguishing characteristic, such as a unique birthmark or other recognizable feature, or from information displayed in connection with the digital depiction.
The term digital depiction means a realistic visual depiction, as that term is defined in section 2256(5) of title 18, United States Code, of an individual that has been created or altered using digital manipulation.
Covered intimate images would include specified exposed body parts, sexual fluids displayed on or transferred to or from an identifiable person's body, and sexually explicit conduct. The bill borrows the definition of sexually explicit conduct from existing law.
The term intimate digital depiction means a digital depiction of an individual that has been created or altered using digital manipulation and that depicts— (A) the uncovered genitals, pubic area, anus, or postpubescent female nipple of an identifiable individual; (B) the display or transfer of bodily sexual fluids— (i) onto any part of the body of an identifiable individual; or (ii) from the body of an identifiable individual; or (C) an identifiable individual engaging in sexually explicit conduct.
The term sexually explicit conduct has the meaning given the term in subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 2256(2) of title 18, United States Code.
A depicted person could sue the discloser in federal district court if the disclosure lacked consent and the discloser knew that or recklessly disregarded whether consent existed. The disclosure would also need the specified connection to commerce between states or with other countries, including use of a means or facility of that commerce.
Except as provided in subsection (e), an individual who is the subject of an intimate digital depiction that is disclosed, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce or using any means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce, without the consent of the individual, where such disclosure was made by a person who knows that, or recklessly disregards whether, the individual has not consented to such disclosure, may bring a civil action against that person in an appropriate district court of the United States for relief as set forth in subsection (d).
For a person under 18, incompetent, incapacitated, or deceased, a guardian, estate representative, family member, or another person the court finds suitable could exercise the person's civil rights under the proposal. The defendant could not serve as that representative or guardian.
In the case of an individual who have not attained 18 years of age or are incompetent, incapacitated, or deceased, the legal guardian of the individual or representative of the individual’s estate, another family member, or any other person appointed as suitable by the court, may assume the individual’s rights under this section, but in no event shall the defendant be named as such representative or guardian.
For civil cases, agreeing to creation of an image would not establish agreement to its disclosure. Valid consent would require a plain-language agreement knowingly and voluntarily signed by the depicted person, describing the image and any audiovisual work incorporating it.
For purposes of an action under subsection (b)— (1) an individual’s consent to the creation of the intimate digital depiction shall not establish that the person consented to its disclosure; and (2) consent shall be deemed validly given only if— (A) it is set forth in an agreement written in plain language signed knowingly and voluntarily by the depicted individual; and (B) it includes a general description of the intimate digital depiction and, if applicable, the audiovisual work into which it will be incorporated.
Civil monetary remedies could include the defendant's financial gain from creating, developing, or disclosing the image, plus either actual damages—including emotional distress—or a fixed $150,000 award. The proposal also permits punitive damages, which punish misconduct, and reasonable attorney's fees and litigation costs.
In a civil action filed under this section, an individual may recover any of the following: (i) An amount equal to the monetary gain made by the defendant from the creation, development, or disclosure of the intimate digital depiction. (ii) Either of the following: (I) The actual damages sustained by the individual as a result of the intimate digital depiction, including damages for emotional distress. (II) Liquidated damages in the amount of $150,000. (iii) Punitive damages. (iv) The cost of the action, including reasonable attorney’s fees and other litigation costs reasonably incurred.
Courts could issue temporary or permanent orders requiring the defendant to stop displaying or disclosing the image, in addition to other available relief.
In a civil action filed under this section, a court may, in addition to any other relief available at law, order equitable relief, including a temporary restraining order, a preliminary injunction, or a permanent injunction ordering the defendant to cease display or disclosure of the intimate digital depiction.
Courts could protect a plaintiff's identity when the plaintiff uses a pseudonym, or assumed name. Courts could also authorize an in camera proceeding, meaning a proceeding conducted privately.
In ordering relief under this subsection, the court may grant injunctive relief maintaining the confidentiality of a plaintiff using a pseudonym.
A court may authorize an in camera proceeding under this section.
The civil remedy would exclude good-faith disclosures to or by law enforcement while reporting or investigating unlawful activity or unsolicited or unwelcome conduct. It would also exclude good-faith disclosures made as part of legal proceedings.
An identifiable individual may not bring an action for relief under this section relating to— (1) a disclosure made in good faith— (A) to or by a law enforcement officer or agency in the course of reporting or investigating— (i) unlawful activity; or (ii) unsolicited or unwelcome conduct; or (B) as part of a legal proceeding;
The civil remedy would also exclude matters of legitimate public concern or interest and disclosures reasonably intended to help the depicted person. Being a public figure would not, by itself, make an image a matter of legitimate public concern or interest.
An identifiable individual may not bring an action for relief under this section relating to—
(2) a matter of legitimate public concern or public interest, except that it shall not be considered a matter of legitimate public interest or public concern solely because the depicted individual is a public figure; or (3) a disclosure reasonably intended to assist the identifiable individual.
Under both the civil and criminal provisions, a disclaimer saying the image was unauthorized or the person did not participate in making it would not be a defense.
It shall not be a defense to an action under this section that there is a disclaimer stating that the intimate digital depiction of the depicted individual was unauthorized or that the depicted individual did not participate in the creation or development of the material.
It shall not be a defense to an action under this section that there is a disclaimer stating that the intimate digital depiction of the depicted individual was unauthorized or that the depicted individual did not participate in the creation or development of the material.
Both provisions would protect interactive computer service providers from liability under the respective section for voluntarily restricting access to intimate digital images in good faith or providing others with technical tools to restrict access. This protection concerns those specified actions.
For purposes of this section, a provider of an interactive computer service shall not be held liable on account of— (1) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of intimate digital depictions; or (2) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or other persons the technical means to restrict access to intimate digital depictions.
For purposes of this section, a provider of an interactive computer service shall not be held liable on account of— (1) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of intimate digital depictions; or (2) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or other persons the technical means to restrict access to intimate digital depictions.
Section 3 would create a federal crime covering disclosure or threatened disclosure connected to interstate or foreign commerce. It would apply when the person intends to harass, annoy, threaten, alarm, or substantially harm the depicted person's finances or reputation, or knows or recklessly disregards whether physical, emotional, reputational, or economic harm will result.
Chapter 110 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 2252C the following: 2252D. Intimate digital depictions
Whoever, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, discloses or threatens to disclose an intimate digital depiction— (1) with the intent to harass, annoy, threaten, alarm, or cause substantial harm to the finances or reputation of the depicted individual; or (2) with actual knowledge that, or reckless disregard for whether, such disclosure or threatened disclosure will cause physical, emotional, reputational, or economic harm to the depicted individual, shall be punished as provided under subsection (b).
The criminal offense clause does not expressly require lack of consent, unlike the civil cause of action. Its stated requirements focus on the disclosure or threat, its connection to commerce, and the person's intent or awareness of harm.
Whoever, in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, discloses or threatens to disclose an intimate digital depiction— (1) with the intent to harass, annoy, threaten, alarm, or cause substantial harm to the finances or reputation of the depicted individual; or (2) with actual knowledge that, or reckless disregard for whether, such disclosure or threatened disclosure will cause physical, emotional, reputational, or economic harm to the depicted individual, shall be punished as provided under subsection (b).
without the consent of the individual, where such disclosure was made by a person who knows that, or recklessly disregards whether, the individual has not consented to such disclosure
The ordinary criminal penalty would be a fine, up to two years in prison, or both.
Any person who commits an offense under subsection (a) shall be— (1) fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 2 years, or both;
The maximum prison term would rise to ten years, with a fine also possible, when a violation involves creation, reproduction, or distribution reasonably expected to affect specified government proceedings or facilitate violence. Covered proceedings include election administration and foreign relations, across federal, state, local, and Tribal government agencies.
(2) fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 10 years, or both, in the case of a violation in which the creation, reproduction, or distribution of the intimate digital depiction could be reasonably expected to— (A) affect the conduct of any administrative, legislative, or judicial proceeding of a Federal, State, local, or Tribal government agency, including the administration of an election or the conduct of foreign relations; or (B) facilitate violence.
The supplied official-actions snapshot, updated October 2, 2026, records introduction in the House and referral to the House Judiciary Committee on March 6, 2025. This snapshot does not establish any later legislative outcome.
Source snapshot updated 2026-10-02T08:06:19Z. 2025-03-06: Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary. 2025-03-06: Introduced in House 2025-03-06: Introduced in House
A closer look
Reviewed version: Introduced in House · 2025-03-06. These findings describe provisions and who may benefit; they are not judgments of waste, corruption, or motive.
This review covers the supplied bill text. “None identified” does not rule out provisions in later versions or accompanying reports and disclosures.
Provisions outside the bill’s main subject, or policy changes attached to appropriations.
None identified in the reviewed text
No unrelated provision or policy change attached to appropriations was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not cover other versions or accompanying materials.
Spending directed to particular recipients or places outside ordinary competitive or formula-based allocation.
None identified in the reviewed text
No congressionally directed spending for particular recipients or places was identified in the complete supplied introduced text. This conclusion does not establish the absence of earmarks in other versions or accompanying materials.
Narrow exceptions, exemptions, or preferential treatment that warrant a closer look.
Findings to examine
The supplied text contains a limited, class-specific liability protection connected to the bill's main policy. Classification as a targeted benefit is not a judgment about its justification.
Interactive computer service providers would receive express protection from liability under both new sections for voluntarily restricting access to intimate digital images in good faith and for supplying technical means for others to restrict access. This is a benefit for a specified provider class and specified conduct, rather than general immunity for disclosures.
For purposes of this section, a provider of an interactive computer service shall not be held liable on account of— (1) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of intimate digital depictions; or (2) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or other persons the technical means to restrict access to intimate digital depictions.
For purposes of this section, a provider of an interactive computer service shall not be held liable on account of— (1) any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to or availability of intimate digital depictions; or (2) any action taken to enable or make available to information content providers or other persons the technical means to restrict access to intimate digital depictions.
Full text preserved for this analysis. Legislative record snapshot: Oct 2, 2026. How PlainBill uses AI