H.R. 3562: DEFIANCE Act of 2025
Sponsor
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Democrat · NY-14
Bill Progress
Latest Action · May 21, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Deepfake victims get stronger civil rights
Why it matters
As sexually explicit AI-generated fakes spread faster online, this bill would give victims a federal path to sue for up to $250,000 plus attorney fees.
The bill also builds in victim privacy and timing protections. Courts may let plaintiffs use pseudonyms, redact personal identifying information, file under seal, and obtain protective discovery orders. The statute of limitations is 10 years from the later of when the victim reasonably discovers the violation or when the victim turns 18, giving minors extra time to sue. The bill does not override State or Tribal laws that are at least as protective of victims, bars duplicative recovery when the defendant is already subject to a judgment under 18 U.S.C. 2255 for the same conduct or depiction, and includes severability so the rest of the law stays in effect if one piece is struck down.
What does H.R. 3562 do?
Federal lawsuits with a 10-year filing window
The bill lets an identifiable individual sue in an appropriate U.S. district court if the conduct is in or affecting interstate or foreign commerce, or uses a means or facility of interstate or foreign commerce. A lawsuit must be filed within 10 years from the later of when the person reasonably discovers the violation or when the person reaches 18 years of age.
Deepfakes defined by realism, not labels
An "intimate digital forgery" is an intimate visual depiction that falsely represents the person or the intimate conduct, is created using software, machine learning, artificial intelligence, or other technological means, and is indistinguishable from a real image to a reasonable person when viewed as a whole. The bill says it still counts even if labels or context say the image is not authentic.
$150,000 baseline damages, $250,000 in aggravated cases
Victims can seek liquidated damages of $150,000 in standard cases. That rises to $250,000 if the conduct was committed in relation to, or was the direct or proximate cause of, actual or attempted sexual assault, stalking, or harassment.
Covers production, possession, disclosure, and solicitation
For intimate digital forgeries, liability is not limited to posting the image. It also reaches knowingly producing a forgery, possessing it with intent to disclose, knowingly soliciting or receiving it, or knowingly disclosing it while knowing or recklessly disregarding that the person did not consent; producers are covered when harm occurred or was reasonably likely.
Minors and vulnerable victims can sue through guardians
If the identifiable individual is under 18, incompetent, incapacitated, or deceased, a legal guardian may bring the claim. That is important because the bill also ties the 10-year statute of limitations to the later of discovery or the victim turning 18.
Courts can order takedowns and protect identities
Judges may issue temporary restraining orders, preliminary injunctions, and permanent injunctions, including deletion or destruction of the content. Courts may also allow pseudonyms, redact personal identifying information, permit filing under seal, and enter protective orders during discovery.
Who benefits from H.R. 3562?
Victims of non-consensual intimate deepfakes
They gain a federal civil remedy with liquidated damages of $150,000, or $250,000 in cases tied to actual or attempted sexual assault, stalking, or harassment, plus attorney fees, litigation costs, and court-ordered deletion or destruction of content.
Minors targeted by explicit fakes or image disclosures
People harmed before age 18 get extra protection because a guardian can sue for them and the 10-year filing clock runs from the later of discovery or the date they reach 18 years of age.
Victims worried about privacy in court
The bill explicitly allows safeguards like pseudonyms, redaction of personal identifying information, filing under seal, and protective orders, making it less risky to pursue a case in federal court.
Families of deceased or incapacitated victims
Legal guardians can sue when the identifiable individual is incapacitated, incompetent, or deceased, so harmful fake or disclosed intimate images do not become legally untouchable just because the victim cannot personally file.
Who is affected by H.R. 3562?
People who create explicit AI fakes
They could be sued for knowingly producing an intimate digital forgery if they knew or recklessly disregarded that the individual did not consent and that the person was harmed or reasonably likely to be harmed, exposing them to at least $150,000 in liquidated damages.
People who share or try to obtain fake intimate images
The bill reaches not only disclosure but also possession with intent to disclose and knowingly soliciting or receiving an intimate digital forgery, if the person knew or recklessly disregarded the lack of consent.
People who disclose real intimate images without consent
A person who discloses an intimate visual depiction while knowing or recklessly disregarding that the subject did not consent could face a federal civil suit, injunctions, actual damages, and attorney-fee awards.
Courts handling image-abuse cases
Federal district courts would take on these civil actions and manage privacy-heavy proceedings, including pseudonym requests, sealed filings, protective discovery orders, and emergency requests for temporary restraining orders or injunctions.
What Congress Is Saying
H.R. 3562 hasn't been debated on the floor yet.
This section updates when a legislator speaks about it on the floor or in committee.
HR3562 Legislative Journey
House: Committee Action
May 21, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
About the Sponsor
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
Democrat, New York's 14th congressional district · 7 years in Congress
Committees: Energy and Commerce
View full profile →
Cosponsors (53)
This bill has 53 cosponsors: 27 Democrats, 26 Republicans, reflecting bipartisan support. Cosponsors represent 22 states: Arizona, California, Colorado, and 19 more.
Laurel Lee
Republican · FL
Kat Cammack
Republican · FL
Christopher Deluzio
Democrat · PA
Debbie Dingell
Democrat · MI
Michael Lawler
Republican · NY
Ted Lieu
Democrat · CA
Nancy Mace
Republican · SC
Max Miller
Republican · OH
Jamie Raskin
Democrat · MD
Brittany Pettersen
Democrat · CO
Jefferson Van Drew
Republican · NJ
Nydia Velázquez
Democrat · NY
Committee Sponsors
Judiciary Committee
8 of 42 committee members cosponsored
13 Democrats across this committee haven't cosponsored yet. Mobilize their constituents
H.R. 3562 Quick Facts
- Committee
- Judiciary
- Chamber
- House
- Policy
- Crime and Law Enforcement
- Introduced
- May 21, 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
May 21, 2025
Who is lobbying on H.R. 3562?
1 organization lobbying on this bill
VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES | 4 |
Showing 1-1 of 1 organizations
H.R. 3562 Bill Text
“To improve rights to relief for individuals affected by non-consensual activities involving intimate digital forgeries, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. This Act may be cited as the “Disrupt Explicit Forged Images And Non-Consensual Edits Act of 2025” or the “DEFIANCE Act of 2025”.”
Source: U.S. Government Publishing Office
Get notified when H.R. 3562 moves
Committee votes, floor action, cosponsor changes — straight to your inbox.
Bill alerts + Legisletter's monthly briefing. Unsubscribe anytime.
Crime and Law Enforcement Bills
9 related bills we're tracking
Combating Organized Retail Crime Act of 2025
Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 402.
Jan 30, 2026
Assault Weapons Ban of 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Apr 30, 2025
Closing the Bump Stock Loophole Act of 2025
Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Ways and Means, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Apr 9, 2025
Office of Gun Violence Prevention Act of 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Feb 13, 2025
Equal Access to Justice for Victims of Gun Violence Act of 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Jun 4, 2025
Protect and Serve Act of 2025
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Feb 25, 2025
Federal Extreme Risk Protection Order Act of 2026
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Feb 17, 2026
Combating Illicit Xylazine Act
Referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Feb 12, 2025
Law-Enforcement Innovate to De-Escalate Act
Received in the Senate.
Feb 24, 2026
Trending Right Now
Bills gaining momentum across Congress
INSULIN Act of 2026
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions.
Mar 25, 2026
Congressional Tribute to Constance Baker Motley Act of 2025
Referred to the House Committee on Financial Services.
Sep 11, 2025
GUARDRAILS Act
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
Mar 26, 2026
Tracking Crime and Law Enforcement in Congress? Monitor bills, track cosponsor momentum, and launch advocacy campaigns — all from one advocacy platform.