Tennessee’s primary-election AI ads test the limits of the state’s new deepfake law

With Tennessee’s congressional primary three days away, AI-generated attack ads in the 6th Congressional District are testing what the state’s new deepfake-disclosure law can do before voters cast ballots.

Republican candidates Johnny Garrett and Van Hilleary used AI-generated visuals in recent campaign advertisements without clearly disclosing that the depictions were not real, according to WPLN News. Their ads have put a practical question in front of Tennessee voters: who can act, and how quickly, when a campaign uses deepfake material covered by the new law?

What voters saw in the 6th District race

Hilleary’s campaign ad showed an AI-generated version of Garrett shaking hands with drag queens, appearing with former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and standing near a whiteboard containing a statement about systemic racism, WPLN reported.

Garrett’s campaign used AI-generated material depicting Hilleary driving a campaign bus into a swamp. WPLN reported that the ad did not show Hilleary’s face beyond details on the bus, but presented a depiction intended to represent him.

Neither campaign responded to WPLN’s request for comment about whether it would pursue legal action against the other. The station reported that no complaint had been recorded in the 6th District as of July 24.

What Tennessee’s new law requires

Public Chapter 625, enacted through House Bill 1513, took effect July 1, 2026. It requires a political advertisement to include a disclaimer when it uses deepfake elements that impersonate or depict a candidate engaging in conduct or speech that did not occur.

A violation of that disclaimer requirement is a Class C misdemeanor. The law also allows the candidate who was depicted to seek damages and equitable relief in civil court.

The law does not prohibit every use of artificial intelligence in campaign advertising. Its disclosure requirement applies to specified deepfake depictions or impersonations. An AI-created illustration, altered image or dramatization may raise different legal questions depending on how it depicts a candidate and whether the required disclaimer is included.

The legislation also protects a radio or television broadcaster, cable or satellite operator, streaming service or other programming service from liability when it was paid to carry material containing a deepfake and was not responsible for creating it.

Who can act on a disputed ad?

WPLN reported that the Tennessee Bureau of Ethics and Campaign Finance does not handle enforcement under the new law. Instead, a voter would need to complain to a local district attorney to seek an investigation, while a candidate depicted in an ad could bring a civil lawsuit against another candidate.

That complaint-driven structure leaves no guaranteed pre-election remedy. A complaint does not ensure that prosecutors will investigate or that any action will occur before the Aug. 6 primary. A civil case also may not produce a court order before voting ends.

A broader ban did not become law

Tennessee lawmakers considered a separate proposal, House Bill 2214, that would have prohibited distributing certain electoral deepfakes within 90 days of an election. The proposal addressed deceptive or fraudulent depictions of candidates or political parties and included civil penalties and possible court relief.

The General Assembly’s bill history shows that HB 2214 was taken off notice in the Elections and Campaign Finance Subcommittee on March 10, 2026. It did not become law.

That distinction matters for voters and campaigns. The law now in effect is primarily a disclosure requirement backed by criminal and civil remedies. It is not the broader 90-day prohibition lawmakers considered earlier in the session.

What voters should expect before Aug. 6

The Federal Election Commission’s 2026 calendar lists Tennessee’s congressional primary for Aug. 6, while noting that the dates are subject to change and that the calendar used data available May 18, 2026. With the primary approaching, voters may continue to see realistic campaign visuals generated or altered by artificial intelligence.

Voters should treat such material as a claim requiring verification, particularly when an advertisement does not clearly disclose that an image, video or depiction is synthetic or dramatized. The new law may provide criminal or civil remedies for covered conduct, but it does not create automatic state review or guarantee that a disputed ad will be removed before the election.

Sources

Discover more from Interactive News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.