Bill would ban undisclosed AI‑manipulated political ads within 90 days of an election; enforcement concerns raised

Senator John Kavanaugh introduced LB615 to prohibit distribution of deceptive, AI‑generated or AI‑manipulated political materials within 90 days of an election unless the material carries a disclosure that it was altered or created using artificial intelligence. The bill ties enforcement primarily to injunctive or equitable relief in court rather than administrative sanction, and an amendment (AM171) presented with the bill would shift legal responsibility for compliance to advertisers rather than broadcasters.

Kavanaugh told the committee the proposal is intended to address growing risks from synthetic audio and video that can impersonate candidates or mislead voters. He cited a recent out‑of‑state example of an AI‑generated voicemail purportedly in the voice of a presidential candidate giving false election information and argued that a required disclosure would help voters identify manipulated content. “We’re not saying somebody can’t put out these videos, we’re saying you have to disclose that that was generated with AI,” Kavanaugh said.

Testimony identified practical obstacles. David Hunter, executive director of the Nebraska Accountability and Disclosure Commission, testified in opposition and said the Commission cannot presently administer or enforce the bill as written: it lacks reliable methods to determine whether media is synthetic, would need technical experts, and could face jurisdictional problems when deceptive media originates outside Nebraska. Hunter also noted that the NADC historically does not adjudicate truth in campaign speech and that the agency had previously removed a statutory prohibition on materially false statements in the 1980s after court challenge.

Common Cause Nebraska testified in a neutral capacity and encouraged continued legislative attention because the technology and legal landscape are evolving. An AI specialist who identified himself to the committee said detection can be technically challenging and that distinguishing legitimate political speech from deceptive synthetic content requires careful definitions.

Committee members questioned enforcement, costs, scope (which elections would be covered), and possible exemptions for broadcasters and streaming platforms. The sponsor and some testifiers emphasized injunctive relief (a court order to remove or stop distribution) as the primary remedy rather than administrative fines. The committee did not adopt a final position or vote on LB615 during the hearing.