MONTGOMERY, Ala. — Alabama lawmakers were quick to act on one of the most alarming uses of artificial intelligence: synthetic sexual images of children.
But as state leaders celebrated a 2024 law aimed at AI-generated child sexual abuse material, Alabama has so far stopped short of enacting a broader consent-based rule for AI images that mimic real, living people — a gap that critics say leaves workers, students, women, politicians and ordinary residents exposed to deceptive deepfakes.
The state’s Child Protection Act, signed by Gov. Kay Ivey in 2024, expanded Alabama’s child sexual abuse material law to cover images created or altered with artificial intelligence. It came after lawmakers moved unanimously and framed the measure as necessary to keep pace with rapidly advancing technology. Supporters said it gave prosecutors and victims more tools to respond to synthetic child sexual abuse images.
But the law addresses only one slice of the AI image problem. It does not create a general requirement that people obtain permission before generating or distributing realistic images of living people, nor does it establish a broad civil or criminal framework for nonconsensual deepfakes involving adults.
That narrower focus is now drawing new attention as Alabama considers additional AI legislation. A separate bill introduced this year, SB129, would require developers of generative AI systems to add clear disclosures to AI-generated images, video and audiovisual content, including metadata identifying the content as AI-generated, the tool used and the time it was created. The proposal is aimed at transparency, not a blanket ban.
The distinction matters. Deepfake technology can be used to impersonate real people in ways that do not involve sexual material at all — for political smear campaigns, fake endorsements, fraudulent schemes or humiliating doctored photos that spread quickly online. Privacy advocates argue those harms deserve their own legal response, not just laws focused on child exploitation.
Alabama’s current approach reflects a broader national pattern: states have been faster to target the most extreme and universally condemned uses of AI, especially child sexual abuse material, than to build a wider legal structure for consent, likeness rights and nonconsensual synthetic media. That leaves a policy gap in the middle, where realistic AI images of adults can cause serious harm without clearly fitting into existing law.
For now, Alabama has drawn a hard line around child sexual abuse imagery. The broader question of whether anyone should be allowed to make realistic images of a living person without consent remains unanswered.