# AI-generated content is flooding political campaigns. California lawmakers are trying to regulate it > Source: > Published: 2026-08-14 11:00:49+00:00 **Getting your** [Trinity Audio](//trinityaudio.ai)player ready...A political ad released last month depicts [Gov. Gavin Newsom](https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/06/25/gov-gavin-newsom-release-first-in-the-nation-tool-to-track-ai-related-job-losses/) operating a robotic Democratic Party machine that chooses former Health Secretary [Xavier Becerra](https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/06/09/its-official-becerra-hilton-move-onto-november-governors-election/) as the next governor. **RELATED: Policy outweighs biography for Becerra and Hilton supporters, poll finds** Newsom explains to his would-be successor that the machine was “created to make sure that nothing ever changes” — as long as Becerra “submit(s) to the machine,” he doesn’t have to do anything. Becerra grins, telling Newsom, “I can do that.” The ad, which was released by [Steve Hilton](https://www.mercurynews.com/2026/07/22/endorsed-by-trump-steve-hilton-asks-presidents-critics-to-vote-for-him/), Becerra’s Republican rival in the November governor’s election, includes a disclaimer at the end of the video, which runs for more than two minutes, that it was “generated or substantially altered using artificial intelligence.” It’s among the many AI-generated campaign ads that have begun flooding social media ahead of the 2026 midterms. While Hilton has been clear that his ad is more in the style of satire, some AI-generated ads, particularly deepfakes, are designed to mislead, raising concerns among some California lawmakers about the spread of political disinformation that could deceive voters. “Fraudulent AI advertising has already proliferated in races across the country, and if Congress does not act, this runaway challenge will only get worse as AI becomes increasingly capable of blurring the lines between fact and fiction,” said U.S. Sen. Adam Schiff in a news release as he and Silicon Valley Rep. Ro Khanna last month reintroduced the AI Ads Act in Congress. Schiff’s bill updates an existing election law already on the books that prohibits fraudulent political ads, amending it so that it also includes content generated by AI. A video on his YouTube channel includes clips from Hilton’s ad as examples of the proliferation of AI-generated campaign ads. Other examples included an ad with AI-generated video of Kentucky Republican Rep. Thomas Massie holding hands and dining with Democratic Reps. Alexandria Ocasio Cortez and Ilhan Omar, and another in which an AI-generated likeness of New York Gov. Kathy Hochul tells viewers to “Keep it unsafe and unaffordable with Kathy Hochul.” The bill only applies to federal elections and the recourse for fraudulent political AI ads would be to file a complaint with the Federal Election Commission. Proponents of using AI-generated content in campaigns contend that it’s political speech protected by the First Amendment. Hector Barajas, a spokesperson for Hilton’s campaign, said in a statement that they opted to launch an ad generated by AI because it’s “one of the most powerful creative tools available today.” When asked whether the former Fox News host supported restrictions on the use of “deepfakes” in political ads, Barajas said they support transparency and that “there’s an important distinction between innovation and deception.” “The greater concern today isn’t campaigns that openly disclose what they’ve created,” Barajas said. “It’s anonymous actors using AI to spread misinformation without accountability. That’s where transparency and disclosure matter most.” But critics argue that many of these ads are purposefully created to be deceptive — especially deepfakes that seek to use someone else’s likeness and put words in their mouth. As AI models advance, they worry it could produce even more realistic content that is increasingly hard to distinguish from what is real. “It’s going to make us distrust everyone and everything,” Ramesh Srinivasan, a professor of information studies at the University of California, Los Angeles, said about AI-generated political ads. “Both are sledgehammers to democracy because you have to have not just a common basis of understanding of reality or what the truth is, but you also have to have some basic notion of trust in what you see.” California has tried to prepare for this moment, passing a slate of laws in recent years aimed at regulating deepfakes that use AI-generated images or videos to depict people saying or doing something they didn’t. State law also requires campaign ads to disclose whether they are made with AI. An AI-generated video aiming to boost Los Angeles mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt ahead of the June primary by portraying him as Batman and his rival, Mayor Karen Bass, as the Joker raised alarms for some lawmakers earlier this year who worried it ran afoul of the state law by not disclosing that it was made with AI. But a state law that would have required social media platforms to restrict AI-generated political content ahead of an election was ultimately struck down by a federal judge last year. The judge ruled that it violated part of the Communications Decency Act, a federal law that protects platforms from legal liability for what their users post. President Donald Trump has also made it more difficult for California to create its own regulations. The president issued an executive order last year adopting a national framework for AI policy that aims to limit state-by-state regulation that he argued would thwart innovation. While an executive order alone can’t preempt state legislation, the order also assembled an AI Litigation Task Force under the U.S. Department of Justice to challenge state laws it believes aren’t in line with the president’s edict. “It’s been very frustrating,” said state Assemblymember Marc Berman, a Palo Alto Democrat who authored the AI law that was struck down by the court. “I think the reality is what we need is strong federal law to regulate in this space.” Experts say that AI-generated content is likely to become a major media strategy for campaigns and political action committees moving forward. The Hilton ad was produced by filmmaker Charles Curran — the same creator who released the Pratt ads, which attracted widespread attention for the Los Angeles mayoral candidate before he was eliminated in the June primary. Curran did not respond to a request for comment. Berman said the depictions of politicians in the Hilton ad looked “obviously fake,” but still expressed concerns about what kinds of hyper-realistic AI-generated ads could come in the future. The First Amendment balancing test will likely be an obstacle in regulating the content of AI-generated political ads. David Inserra, a fellow for free expression and technology at the Cato Institute, said that because “AI is a tool of expression,” lawmakers need to be careful about trying to regulate it. The U.S. Supreme Court has handed down a number of rulings that enforce the importance of political speech — even when it’s uncomfortable. In one 1989 case, the Supreme Court ruled that burning the American flag is protected by the First Amendment. Those protections, however, often end if political speech is inciting illegal activity, is obscene or is considered defamation. “If you’re restricting lawful political speech, then that is restricting the ability of people to express themselves regarding elections and their democracy,” Inserra said. He likened AI-generated ads to political cartoons in newspapers that satirize and parody politicians, and said the way to address misinformation and disinformation is through the use of libel laws. But Berman disagrees with the free speech argument being made by proponents of AI-generated political ads. “The First Amendment allows you to say what you want to say, it does not allow you to put your words into my mouth,” he said. “And that’s literally what this technology allows is for somebody else to create a very, very realistic looking video of me saying things or doing things that I never said or did.” The AI Ads Act would prohibit the fraudulent misrepresentation of candidates or campaigns through AI-generated content. It would remove the requirement that the fraudulent misrepresentation must pertain to a matter that is “damaging” to another candidate or political party. What would that mean for policing campaign advertising? In the video posted to Schiff’s YouTube channel, the senator said that it “would make sure that fraud laws that cover other deceptive advertising practices also cover the use of AI to produce fake and phony advertisements.” “We need to make sure that there are full disclosures when AI is used in ads, and that if someone uses AI they’re not off the hook for plainly fraudulent conduct,” [Schiff says in his video](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eo9kLbmxJcs). It’s unclear how many ads Schiff showcased in his video would potentially be considered out of bounds — he acknowledges in it that some are clearly parody, while others do try to use a politician’s likeness. Srinivasan, the UCLA professor, said that AI can now dynamically create content based on your data that’s “just for you.” At scale, he worries that it will lead to people living in “non-overlapping worlds” based on what content is targeting them. The professor, who previously served as a surrogate for Sen. Bernie Sanders 2020 presidential campaign, said he’s been pushing for other types of regulations, such as requiring watermarks on AI-generated content at the very minimum. He believes that AI should serve people — not act as a “technology of replacement” or be used to “misappropriate people’s lives and their data.” “I fervently believe that we we can and must regulate this industry,” he said. “Not as a buzzkill, not as a way to stop innovation, but to ensure innovation serves all interests. And actually to me, that’s true innovation.”