����ֱ��

This essay was by the Austin American-Statesman on May 2, 2025.

Texans aren’t exactly shy about speaking their minds — whether it’s at city hall, in the town square, or all over social media. But a slate of bills now moving through the Texas Legislature threatens to make that proud tradition a criminal offense.

In the name of regulating artificial intelligence, lawmakers are proposing bills that could turn political memes, commentary and satire into crimes.

 and , and  and , might be attempting to protect election integrity, but these bills actually impose sweeping restrictions that could silence ordinary Texans just trying to express their opinions.

Take SB 893 and its companion . These would make it a crime to create and share AI-generated images, audio recordings, or videos if done with the intent to “deceive” and “influence the result of an election.” The bill offers a limited safeguard: If you want to share any images covered by the bill, you must edit them to add a government-mandated warning label.

But the bills never define what counts as “deceptive,” handing prosecutors a blank check to decide what speech crosses the line. That’s a recipe for selective enforcement and criminalizing unpopular opinions. And SB 893 has already passed the Senate.

Vague laws and open-ended definitions shouldn’t dictate what Texans can say, how they can say it, or which tools they’re allowed to use.

HB 366, which just passed the House, goes even further. It would require a disclaimer on any political ad that contains “altered media,” even when the content isn’t misleading. With the provisions applying to anyone spending at least $100 on political advertising, which is easily the amount a person could spend to boost a social media post or to print some flyers, a private citizen could be subject to the law.

Once this threshold is met, an AI-generated meme, a five-second clip on social media, or a goofy Photoshop that gives the opponent a giant cartoon head would all suddenly need a legal warning label. No exceptions for satire, parody or commentary are included. If it didn’t happen in real life, you’re legally obligated to slap a disclaimer on it.

HB 556 and SB 228 take a similarly broad approach, treating all generative AI as suspect and criminalizing creative political expression.

These proposals aren’t just overkill, they’re unconstitutional. Courts have long held that parody, satire and even sharp political attacks are protected speech. Requiring Texans to add disclaimers to their opinions simply because they used modern tools to express them is not transparency. It’s compelled speech.

Besides, Texas already has laws on the books to address defamation, fraud and election interference. What these bills do is expand government control over how Texans express themselves while turning political expression into a legal minefield.

Fighting deception at the ballot box shouldn’t mean criminalizing creativity or chilling free speech online. Texans shouldn’t need a lawyer to know whether they can post a meme they made on social media or make a joke about a candidate.

Political life in Texas has been known to be colorful, rowdy and fiercely independent — and that’s how it should stay. Vague laws and open-ended definitions shouldn’t dictate what Texans can say, how they can say it, or which tools they’re allowed to use.

The Texas Legislature should scrap these overbroad AI bills and defend the Lone Star state’s real legacy: fearless, unapologetic free speech.