House Approves ‘Take It Down’ Act to Criminalize Deepfake Revenge Photos
On Monday, the House overwhelmingly passed the Take It Down Act, legislation aimed at outlawing the distribution of nonconsensual sexually explicit deepfake images. The bill now moves to President Trump, who has indicated he will sign it into law.
The measure passed by a wide margin, 409–2, with 22 lawmakers not casting votes. The only dissenting votes came from Reps. Thomas Massie (R-Ky.) and Eric Burlison (R-Mo.), according to The Hill.
Under the bill, it would be a federal offense to knowingly share realistic, computer-generated pornographic content that falsely portrays real individuals, especially on social media or other online platforms.
Trump expressed his support for the legislation earlier this year, saying during a March joint session of Congress, “The Senate just passed the Take It Down Act. Once it passes the House, I look forward to signing that bill into law,” adding, “And I’m going to use that bill for myself too if you don’t mind, because nobody gets treated worse than I do online, nobody.”
First Lady Melania Trump has also backed the initiative, participating in a roundtable on the subject last month. After Monday’s vote, she praised the outcome in a statement: “Today’s bipartisan passage of the Take It Down Act is a powerful statement that we stand united in protecting the dignity, privacy, and safety of our children.”
The bill was introduced in the Senate by Commerce Committee Chair Ted Cruz (R-Texas) and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), while Reps. Elvira Salazar (R-Fla.) and Madeline Dean (D-Pa.) led the House version.
Calling the bill’s approval a “historic win in the fight to protect victims of revenge porn and deepfake abuse,” Cruz emphasized its impact. “By requiring social media companies to take down this abusive content quickly, we are sparing victims from repeated trauma and holding predators accountable,” he said in a statement.
Massie, one of the two House members who voted against the bill, explained his opposition in a post on X (formerly Twitter): “I’m voting NO because I feel this is a slippery slope, ripe for abuse, with unintended consequences.”
This legislation marks the first youth online safety bill to successfully pass through Congress this session. It comes after previous efforts stalled last year, despite ongoing pressure from families and safety advocates for measures that would hold tech platforms accountable for harm caused to minors, The Hill reported.
Another key piece of legislation in this area, the Kids Online Safety Act (KOSA), has received strong backing from child safety proponents. KOSA would set regulations for how tech and social media companies interact with child users. While the Senate passed it 91–3 last session, it faced roadblocks in the House over concerns from GOP leadership about potential restrictions on free speech.
Despite speculation that Trump’s past conflicts with Big Tech might influence his stance on the matter, Sen. Cruz told The Hill he isn’t concerned. “Every conversation I’ve had with the Trump administration on this topic has evidenced a commitment to protecting free speech and ending Big Tech censorship,” he said, citing both the president’s and first lady’s endorsement of the Take It Down Act.
The bill’s passage has been welcomed by several advocacy organizations, including Americans for Responsible Innovation (ARI), which focuses on AI-related issues.
“For the first time in years, Congress is passing legislation to protect vulnerable communities online and requiring tech giants to clean up their act,” said ARI President Brad Carson. “This bill is going to make a difference in the lives of victims and prevent another generation from being targeted with non-consensual intimate deepfakes.”
However, not everyone sees the legislation as a step forward. Critics warn it may have unintended consequences for digital expression.
“The TAKE IT DOWN Act is a missed opportunity for Congress to meaningfully help victims of nonconsensual intimate imagery,” said Becca Branum, deputy director of the Center for Democracy and Technology’s Free Expression Project. “The best of intentions can’t make up for the bill’s dangerous implications for constitutional speech and privacy online,” she added.