A federal judge has struck down Hawaii’s election “deepfake” law, calling it a violation of free political expression. In The Babylon Bee v. Lopez, U.S. District Judge Shanlyn Park ruled that Act 191, which criminalized or penalized the use of certain AI-generated media during elections, infringed on both the First and Fourteenth Amendments.
The ruling permanently blocks enforcement of the statute, which had been set to take effect on February 1. The satirical website The Babylon Bee and Hawaii-based content creator Dawn O’Brien brought the case, arguing that the law threatened parody and political commentary protected by the Constitution.
We obtained a copy of the order for you here.
Act 191 would have made it a crime to share or repost “materially deceptive media” without a disclaimer during election periods if that material could be seen as damaging a candidate’s reputation or influencing voters. It covered any AI-altered image, video, or audio that showed a person “engaging in speech or conduct in which the depicted individual did not in fact engage” and that a “reasonable viewer or listener” might believe was authentic.
SIMILAR: Judge Strikes Down California Deepfake Censorship Law
Although broadcasters and most online intermediaries were exempt unless they helped create or knowingly distributed such content, the law still applied broadly to individual users and content creators.
Judge Park’s opinion dismantled the measure, describing it as a direct restriction on political speech and creative expression. “Political speech, of course, is at the core of what the First Amendment is designed to protect,” she wrote. The court found that compelled disclaimers would distort the meaning and effect of satirical speech.
“As plaintiffs point out, Act 191’s compelled disclaimer would impermissibly alter the content, intended effect, and message of their speech,” Park wrote. “Put simply, a mandatory disclaimer for parody or satire would kill the joke.”
Supporters of Act 191, including Governor Josh Green, had described it as a necessary defense against misinformation in the era of artificial intelligence. Lawmakers said AI-generated videos or fake audio could mislead voters or inflame tensions during elections. The measure passed with near-unanimous legislative approval in 2024, but the court found that the government’s aims did not justify limiting protected expression.
Judge Park said Hawaii failed to show that its goals could not be achieved through less restrictive means. She pointed to digital literacy education, voluntary counter-speech campaigns, and enforcement of existing laws on defamation and fraud as viable alternatives.
“[State defendants] have failed to demonstrate that existing laws are insufficient to deal with the purported risk of political deepfakes and generative AI technologies on the integrity of Hawaii elections,” she wrote.
The opinion also criticized the statute for vague and subjective language that left unclear what conduct was prohibited. The law’s focus on “risk” rather than concrete harm, Park explained, gave enforcement agencies too much discretion and created a danger of selective prosecution based on viewpoint.
“Rather than require actual harm, Act 191 imposes a risk assessment based solely on the value judgments and biases of the enforcement agency, which could conceivably lead to discretionary and targeted enforcement that discriminates based on viewpoint,” she wrote.
“This decision marks yet another victory for the First Amendment and for anyone who values the right to speak freely on political matters without government interference,” said The Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon. “We are grateful to Alliance Defending Freedom for representing us as we continue to challenge laws that treat comedy like a crime.”
By striking down Act 191, the court reaffirmed that satire and parody remain protected forms of political participation even when created with new technology. The decision prevents Hawaii from regulating humor, commentary, or artistic expression under the guise of protecting election integrity.
The ruling leaves Hawaii without a dedicated deepfake election statute as the 2026 campaign season approaches and may influence similar efforts in other states that are considering restrictions on AI-generated political media.
