Senator Amy Klobuchar has acknowledged what opponents of her legislation have been warning all along.
In a recent New York Times opinion piece, she confirmed that her proposed NO FAKES Act would be used to censor AI-generated parody.
Her target is a meme video that pokes fun at her reaction to an American Eagle jeans advertisement featuring actress Sydney Sweeney.
Rather than brush off the obvious satire, Klobuchar doubled down on the need to suppress it. “As anyone would, I wanted the video taken down or at least labeled ‘digitally altered content,’” she wrote.
She applauded TikTok for removing the clip, praised Meta for tagging it, and expressed frustration that X would not help her attach a Community Note.
This public complaint confirms that the NO FAKES Act, Senate Bill 1367, is not just about preventing identity theft or stopping fraud. Klobuchar is one of the bill’s lead authors, and she is openly calling for legal tools to remove content that ridicules her.
The bill gives individuals the right to sue over the creation or distribution of “unauthorized digital replicas.”
It also places heavy compliance burdens on platforms, which would face steep fines for failing to remove flagged content quickly or for not implementing policies to suspend repeat offenders.
While the bill claims to allow space for parody, satire, and documentaries, Klobuchar’s statements make it clear that those exemptions offer little practical protection.
The parody video in question shows an AI-generated version of Klobuchar speaking at a fake Senate hearing, ranting about Democrats needing more visibility in advertising. The fictional version of the senator says, “If Republicans are going to have beautiful girls with perfect titties…we want ugly, fat bitches wearing pink wigs and long-ass fake nails being loud and twerking on top of a cop car at a Waffle House ‘cause they didn’t get extra ketchup.”
The video continues with the fake Klobuchar declaring, “Just because we’re the party of ugly people doesn’t mean we can’t be featured in ads, okay?”
The clip is clearly not real and was never presented as such, but Klobuchar is calling for its removal anyway. That admission raises serious questions about the bill’s true purpose and the viability of its so-called protections for satire.
Klobuchar did not stop with the NO FAKES Act.
She also endorsed several other legislative efforts that raise alarms for those concerned with civil liberties. These include the TAKE IT DOWN Act, which is framed as a measure against non-consensual intimate imagery but includes vague provisions that could result in widespread takedowns.
She praised the European Union’s AI Act, which legalizes large-scale biometric surveillance. She also highlighted a Danish proposal that would grant individuals control over their likeness, including face and voice, allowing them to demand the removal of unauthorized AI content.
All of these measures prioritize content removal and censorship over any meaningful protection for free expression. The supposed balance between safety and rights is nowhere to be found.
California attempted something similar, but a federal judge issued an injunction, ruling that parody and satire are protected under the First Amendment. The court referenced long-standing Supreme Court precedent affirming that fear of digital deception does not justify blanket censorship.
Internationally, the Digital Services Act in the EU mandates content takedowns based on decisions by government-aligned “trusted flaggers.” Noncompliant platforms risk fines of up to 6 percent of their global revenue.
