Alaska committee hears bill requiring school policies on digital harassment and nonconsensual impersonation

Representative David Nelson presented House Bill 240 on Feb. 23, 2026, asking the House Education Committee to require school districts to adopt policies that address digital harassment and nonconsensual digital impersonation.

"As technological advances in artificial intelligence and the proliferation of social media have made clear, school children are now susceptible to new methods of bullying and harassment," Nelson told the committee, explaining that the bill adds definitions and reporting/training requirements and places the effective date at Jan. 1, 2027.

Donna Fox Page, staff to Representative Nelson, walked the committee through statutory changes in the bill, which amend AS 14.33.200 (district policy obligations), AS 14.30.310 (reporting of harassment), and add a definition for nonconsensual digital impersonation. The draft also addresses training materials and limits on discipline for false accusations.

A high-school student who identified herself only as Alexandra (the record uses a first name because she is under 18) told the committee that deepfakes and fake accounts on platforms such as Instagram, Snapchat and TikTok spread in seconds and can 'destroy someone's reputation' and damage mental health. "Schools need clear tools to handle these new forms of bullying," she said.

Committee members voiced general support for addressing digital harassment but asked detailed questions. Representative Schwanke asked whether the policy belongs in local district handbooks or should be advanced to state statute; Alexandra recommended starting with school policy, while Nelson said he viewed the bill as a near-term, implementable step and that broader statutory work on AI could follow.

Kelly Manning, Deputy Director for the Division of Innovation and Education Excellence at the Department of Education and Early Development, told members the department provides statewide guidance on bullying and has rolled out AI policy guidance, but does not yet have materials explicitly addressing AI-enabled online harassment or deepfakes. Manning said districts are free to adopt local policies and DEED could update its materials to provide specific support.

Members asked the sponsor to provide model policies and examples from districts, and raised First Amendment and definition questions (for example, whether an emoji reaction could qualify as 'digital harassment'). Donna Fox Page noted section 6 of the bill provides a definition of impersonation tied to materially representing the appearance, speech or behavior of an individual in a way that changes the person’s fundamental character, and argued that a simple emoji would likely not meet that threshold.

With public testimony closed, the committee requested additional clarifications from the sponsor and the department and set HB 240 aside for a subsequent hearing.