Arizona Rep. Lorena Austin Weighs Legal Action Over Undisclosed AI Images

The images are no longer online, but Austin’s possible response could test whether Arizona’s candidate-protection laws offer a practical remedy after deceptive campaign content spreads.

By 2 min read
Arizona Rep. Lorena Austin Weighs Legal Action Over Undisclosed AI Images
Arizona Rep. Lorena Austin Weighs Legal Action Over Undisclosed AI Images

Listen to this story

The audio brief

About 1:33
0:001:33
Read transcript
Arizona state Representative Lorena Austin is weighing legal action after activists linked to Turning Point posted and then deleted AI-generated images falsely showing her campaigning for Republican gubernatorial candidate Andy Biggs. The images placed Austin with people holding a “Democratas Por Biggs” sign in downtown Mesa, while captions suggested she had joined the effort. Austin says she was out of town, does not support Biggs, and was never contacted about the campaign. The posts did not disclose that the images were synthetically generated. Biggs’s official campaign disavowed them, saying they were not connected to his operation. Turning Point USA did not respond to a request for comment from Phoenix New Times. Austin has not filed a lawsuit, but she said everything is on the table. Arizona’s 2024 election laws could provide two possible routes. Under A-R-S sixteen ten twenty-three, a candidate can seek a court declaration or an order stopping an undisclosed digital impersonation that would not be obvious to a reasonable person. A second law, A-R-S sixteen ten twenty-four, targets knowingly distributed fraudulent candidate deepfakes during the ninety days before an election unless they are clearly labeled as AI-generated. Covered undisclosed content can also carry a ten-dollar-per-day penalty, though no court has decided whether that applies here. A prior suit by former lawmaker Joseph Chaplik over AI imagery ended without a lasting ruling. The key question is whether Arizona’s untested protections can offer a practical remedy after deceptive posts have already disappeared.

Story brief

3 key points

Arizona Rep. Lorena Austin is weighing a lawsuit after Turning Point-linked activists circulated and removed AI-generated photos falsely depicting her endorsing Republican gubernatorial candidate Andy Biggs. The posts lacked synthetic-media disclosure, while Arizona’s 2024 laws create potential remedies: candidates can seek court orders over non-obvious digital impersonation, and certain election-period deepfakes...

  1. 01

    ARS 16-1023 allows declaratory and injunctive relief; covered undisclosed content may also carry a $10-per-day penalty.

  2. 02

    ARS 16-1024 targets knowingly distributed fraudulent candidate deepfakes within 90 days of an election unless clearly labeled AI-generated.

  3. 03

    Biggs’s campaign disavowed the posts; Turning Point USA did not respond to Phoenix New Times.

Arizona state Rep. Lorena Austin is considering legal action after Turning Point activists posted and later deleted AI-generated images that portrayed the Democrat helping campaign for Republican gubernatorial candidate Andy Biggs. Austin said the images were fake, and the posts gave no disclosure that their likeness had been synthetically generated.

A fabricated endorsement

The posts showed Austin with people placing a “Democratas Por Biggs” sign in downtown Mesa. Captions by Turning Point activist Matt Whitmire and Turning Point Action manager Mary Ann Mendoza suggested Austin had joined the effort. Austin told Phoenix New Times that they were out of town when the images circulated, did not support Biggs and had not been contacted about supporting his campaign.

The official Biggs campaign said the posts were not from or connected to its campaign. Turning Point USA did not respond to Phoenix New Times’ request for comment. The posts are gone, but the question of legal action remains open: Austin has not filed a lawsuit.

Rules that may apply

Arizona enacted two relevant laws in 2024. ARS 16-1023 allows a candidate to seek declaratory and injunctive relief over an undisclosed digital impersonation that would not be obvious to a reasonable person. ARS 16-1024 bars knowingly distributing certain fraudulent deepfakes of ballot candidates within 90 days of an election unless their AI origin is clearly identified.

Everything’s on the table right now.

Lorena Austin, speaking to Phoenix New Times

An untested path after removal

The disclosure statute provides for a $10-per-day penalty for covered undisclosed content, though no court has decided whether it applies to these posts. One earlier case citing the same laws did not continue: former state lawmaker Joseph Chaplik sued a Virginia-based super PAC over AI imagery, but his attorney later said the case was no longer ongoing. If Austin proceeds, a court would have to assess the facts under statutes that have yet to produce a lasting case.

Sources

  1. hoodline.comLorena Austin Weighs Lawsuit Over AI Deepfake Photos in Mesa
  2. phoenixnewtimes.comArizona Democrat eyes lawsuit over Turning Point USA AI deepfakes

Loading discussion...