Rep. Vikki Goodwin
The Democratic candidate for Texas lieutenant governor filed a police report on Saturday accusing the Republican incumbent, Dan Patrick, of violating a state law that makes it a crime to produce deepfake videos of political candidates near an election.
The filing centers on two ads released by Mr. Patrick this month that used videos generated by artificial intelligence to depict the Democratic candidate, Vikki Goodwin, describing her policies in words she never said.
“Although the ‘person’ in the video appears to be me, it was not actually me,” Ms. Goodwin, an Austin-area state representative, wrote in an affidavit accompanying the report. “This outrageous behavior by an elected official is criminal.”
Political campaigns around the country have leveraged A.I. to generate attack ads against rival candidates in the 2026 midterm elections. But the filing appeared to be among the few instances of a candidate seeking criminal penalties in response to an A.I. attack.
It was unclear whether Mr. Patrick’s ads were covered by state law, which bars the use of A.I.-generated deepfake videos within 30 days of an election. The ads were posted on Mr. Patrick’s social media accounts during the first two weeks of this month — more than 30 days before Election Day in November.
In the affidavit, Ms. Goodwin argued that the videos violated the law because they remained online within 30 days of the start of early voting.
[…]
More than 30 states now have laws regulating the use of deepfakes in political campaigns, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. Most require disclosure, while a few, including Maryland, Minnesota and Texas, have adopted prohibitions.
The Texas law, passed in 2019, was among the first to regulate deepfake videos of candidates. At the time, the technology was less accessible and less sophisticated, and such videos were uncommon in political campaigns.
The ads against Ms. Goodwin draw on votes she cast as a state representative. But in an interview, she said her views were distorted in the ads, and she worried that the A.I.-generated images could confuse voters.
“There are a lot of people who don’t know me yet who might think this is me,” she said.
Ms. Goodwin said the Texas law does not go far enough. For example, Texas does not require that campaigns disclose when A.I. was used in an advertisement. An effort to require disclosures passed in the State House last year, but failed in the State Senate, which is overseen by Mr. Patrick. Mr. Patrick’s most recent ad ends with a disclosure that the video “contains digitally generated imagery,” though it does not mention artificial intelligence.
See here for the background, and here for a copy of the complaint, which the campaign sent to me. I had hoped someone would take action against this, but I thought it would be an elections ethics situation and I figured it would be an activist or group, not a criminal complaint and not by one of the affected candidates. Not that any of this is a problem – indeed, Rep. Goodwin taking ownership of it strikes me as a much better response than the usual issuing of press releases. There could be some downside, as perhaps some people will see it as whiny or too sensitive – we can’t help but note the gender dynamics of that here – but it also demonstrates an admirable will to fight. Maybe the other affected candidates should take note and consider their own responses. (*)
In any event, as this is unprecedented we have no way of knowing what, if anything, will come of it. Austin PD hasn’t taken action yet, but their automated response says up to five days. I fully agree that the law as it exists doesn’t go far enough, but that’s a job for a future Legislature, hopefully next year. If nothing else, I can’t see any harm, just a lot of potential good, in being on the anti- side of AI crap. We’ll see what else there may be. The Chron has more.
(*) The law in question is a state law about state races, so filing a similar complaint would not be an option for James Talarico.
Dan Patrick is a p.o.s. Shocking turn of events. Perhaps he had one too many Bud Lights, provided to him by his sugar daddy donor that wanted him to get rid of HTC products. He can check into the looney bin to once again avoid responsibility. Would not be the first time.
The Dan Patrick campaign is spreading deepfake lies and should be prosecuted for its crimes. Hope to see that happen.