Prosecutors, academics back narrow identity‑fraud law to curb harmful deepfakes

Delegate Cheryl Pasteur urged a favorable report on HB184, describing the bill as a narrowly tailored response to emerging harms from artificial intelligence and deep‑fake technologies that impersonate identifiable people. Pasteur cited a 2024 episode at Pikesville High School in which a deep‑fake audio recording attributed racist remarks to the principal and triggered threats and reputational damage.

Legal and academic witnesses explained HB184’s limiting features: the content must be so realistic that a reasonable person would think it depicts the actual person (an indistinguishability requirement); the creator or distributor must act knowingly and with intent to defraud, deceive or cause specified harms (economic loss, severe emotional distress, physical injury); and the bill focuses on identity‑fraud‑style harms, not protected parody or commentary. Ben Yellen of the University of Maryland said the bill was crafted to avoid suppressing lawful political speech and satire.

Deputy State Prosecutor Sarah David and Baltimore County prosecutors supported the bill, saying existing fraud statutes do not cleanly address deep‑fake impersonations and that injunctive remedies would help stop viral harms before civil or criminal investigations conclude. The bill drew questions on defenses and the scope of injunctive relief; prosecutors said courts would evaluate First Amendment claims as applied and that the statute targets intent to harm rather than mere creation of synthetic media.

Committee members asked about public‑interest exceptions and the risk of meritless litigation; prosecutors and counsel agreed to refine language in follow‑up drafting and emphasized that the bill’s knowledge and intent elements are central.