Citizen Portal
Sign In

Committee advances Digital Dignity Act after debate over free speech and takedown rules

California State Senate Committee on Digital Technologies and Consumer Protection · April 6, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

SB 1142 would give Californians new control over their digital likeness and establish takedown and evidence-preservation obligations for platforms; sponsors emphasized harms from nonconsensual digital replicas while industry witnesses warned of First Amendment and operational risks.

Sen. Josh Becker introduced SB 1142, the Digital Dignity Act, saying the bill establishes guardrails for online platforms, gives consumers control of their likeness, and deters actors who defame or impersonate Californians with AI'generated replicas. Becker described examples of misuse and fraud and said the measure would provide revocation rights and a 48'hour takedown regime following a court finding.

Jay Jesima of the Transparency Coalition (speaker 22) testified as a sponsor, urging an "I vote" and describing harms from nonconsensual intimate images and deepfakes used for harassment, extortion and misinformation. Industry witnesses including Melissa Ptak of the Motion Picture Association and representatives from the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA) warned the committee that the bill's definitions and notice-and-takedown framework could sweep in protected speech and impose heavy operational burdens on platforms, potentially chilling lawful expression.

Committee members repeatedly raised First Amendment and due'process concerns; several said they would support the bill today but expected more work in judiciary to refine definitions and procedural safeguards. The author and sponsors said they were committed to working on those issues.

Committee staff recorded the motion to pass SB 1142 as amended to the judiciary committee and the roll call showed the measure passed on call (reported 6-0); the author said he would continue negotiation on carve'outs and clarifications for the judiciary hearing.