Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Bipartisan bill targets deepfake scams in financial sector

deepfake langague flowing across a screen
Arkadiusz Warguła/Getty Images

Rogers is the “data wrangler” at BillTrack50. He previously worked on policy in several government departments.

IssueVoter is a nonpartisan, nonprofit online platform dedicated to giving everyone a voice in our democracy. As part of its service, IssueVoter summarizes important bills passing through Congress and sets out the opinions for and against the legislation, helping us to better understand the issues.


BillTrack50, which partners with IssueVoter on this project, offers free tools for citizens to easily research legislators and bills across all 50 states and Congress. It also offers professional tools to help organizations with ongoing legislative and regulatory tracking.

Based on our combined work, I will explore deepfake scams in the financial sector.

Following on our in-depth look at artificial intelligence legislation, we're looking at the Preventing Deep Fake Scams Act. Deepfakes are videos of a person that are digitally altered so they appear to be someone else, which creates the possibility of misleading the viewer. Most legislation around deepfakes concerns their use in nonconsensual pornography or to affect the outcome of an election.

This bill is unusual in that it attempts to tackle deepfake use in committing fraud, by establishing the Task Force on Artificial Intelligence in the Financial Services Sector. The task force will explore the benefits to financial institutions as well as the risks to consumer account security and will be chaired by the secretary of the treasury or a nominee. If the bill passes, the task force will be required to produce a report to Congress within a year that will include advice to financial institutions on how to prevent such fraud and also advice to Congress on how to regulate it effectively.

IssueVoter quotes proponents of the bill (the Democratic and Republican sponsors) who highlight the fast-changing nature of the risks that deepfake technology will make identity theft and fraud easier. It also looks at the need for policy makers to understand these risks to be able to create effective safeguards. Opponents of the bill (from the financial sector) cite the benefits and uses of AI to increase productivity and add value, as well as in actually fighting fraud.

The bill was introduced in the House on Sept. 28, 2023, and has been referred to the Financial Services Committee. It's difficult to predict its chances of success, given the current legislative logjam in Congress but, given its bipartisan nature and modest scope, it might manage to become law.

Other AI legislation

Looking at deepfake and AI legislation more broadly, this stakeholder page details 17 of the most interesting pieces of state and federal legislation that actually become law between 2019 and 2022. The National Defense Authorization Act of 2021 requires the Department of Homeland Security to issue an annual report on deepfakes for five years, but with a broader remit than just the financial sector. The first report (from January 2023) serves more as a baseline assessment of the technologies and risks, with more meaty content to come.

On a state level, Virginia was the first to legislate against deepfakes with SB1736 in 2019, with both California and Texas following suit and passing laws prohibiting the use of deepfakes to influence elections. California also passed a law prohibiting the use of deepfakes in pornography without the explicit consent of the subject.

In 2023, many states introduced AI legislation. Here's a stakeholder page detailing deepfakes bills and another setting out bills aimed at regulating their use during election campaigns.

Six states have enacted legislation. Louisiana, Minnesota, New York and Texas have enacted legislation creating offenses for producing and distributing nonconsensual deepfake pornography. Michigan has enacted four pieces of legislation, aimed at creating offenses for distributing deceptive media, regulating campaign advertising, to define artificial intelligence for this purpose and to provide sentencing guidelines. Washington enacted SB5152, defining synthetic media in campaigning and outlines penalties for improper use (for example, where an appropriately prominent disclaimer was not included).


Read More

A New Norm of DHS Shutdown & Long Airport Lines

Travelers wait in a TSA Pre security line at Miami International Airport on March 17, 2026, in Miami, Florida. Travelers across the country are enduring long airport security lines as a partial federal government shutdown affects the Transportation Security Administration officers working the security lines.

(Joe Raedle/Getty Images/TCA)

A New Norm of DHS Shutdown & Long Airport Lines

If you’ve ever traveled to France, chances are you’ve come up against this all-too-common phenomenon. You get to the train station and, without warning, your train is out of service. Or a restaurant is oddly closed during regular business hours.

“C’est la grève,” you may hear from a local, accompanied by a shrug. It’s the strike.

Keep ReadingShow less
Constitutional Barriers to Nationalizing Elections
US Capitol
US Capitol

Constitutional Barriers to Nationalizing Elections

In the run-up to the midterms, President Trump continues to call for nationalizing congressional elections. He has sought to initiate the process through executive orders, such as one proposing to set “a ballot receipt deadline of Election Day for all methods of voting.” The words and spirit of the United States Constitution—the bedrock textualism and originalism of conservative constitutional interpretation—say he can’t nationalize elections.

Unlike some consequential constitutional questions, it’s not a close call.

Keep ReadingShow less
Unpacking War Powers in the U.S.-Iran Conflict: Who Decides When America Goes to War?

Smoke billows after overnight airstrikes on oil depots on March 8, 2026 in Tehran, Iran.

(Photo by Majid Saeedi/Getty Images)

Unpacking War Powers in the U.S.-Iran Conflict: Who Decides When America Goes to War?

What Is The War Powers Resolution of 1973?

The War Powers Resolution of 1973 is a law enacted by Congress that limits the U.S. president’s ability to wage or escalate military operations overseas. Passed on November 7, 1973 amid the Vietnam War, the War Powers Resolution reasserts Congress’ constitutional power “to declare war” and “to raise and support Armies.” A key provision of the War Powers Resolution requires the president to submit a report to Congress within 48 hours of military deployment in the absence of an official declaration of war by Congress detailing:

  • The circumstances requiring U.S. forces;
  • The constitutional or legislative justification for the president’s actions;
  • The estimated duration of U.S. involvement in the hostilities.

If Congress does not formally declare war or enact special authorization for continuation of the U.S’ involvement in a conflict within 60 days of the report’s submission, the president must withdraw U.S. troops from the hostilities. If Congress does declare war, the president is instructed under the War Powers Resolution to report to Congress periodically on the status of the hostilities no less than once every 6 months.

Keep ReadingShow less
Protestors holding signs, including one that says "let the people vote."

Attendees hold signs advocating for voting rights and against the SAVE America Act at a rally to outside the U.S. Capitol on March 18, 2026 in Washington, DC.

Getty Images, Heather Diehl

SAVE America Act Debate Begins; Mullin for DHS Hearing

Both chambers of Congress are in session this week and next. The House will probably function about like it has been - lots of votes (often by voice) on uncontroversial bills; many fewer votes on Republican priority bills. Lots of hearings this week and a few legislator updates.

Committee Meetings

Both chambers have a busy week with 64 total committee meetings scheduled.

Keep ReadingShow less