Lawmakers Target Critical ‘Revenge Porn’ Loophole for Change

Arizona lawmakers are taking steps to address a loophole in existing legislation aimed at protecting victims from “revenge porn.”

On March 26, the House Judiciary Committee approved a measure by an 8-1 vote that is intended to extend protections against the non-consensual distribution of explicit images. However, concerns have arisen that this measure could inadvertently expose more individuals to felony charges.

Since 2016, Arizona law has classified the unauthorized sharing of nude or sexually explicit images as a felony, typically in cases involving former partners who release intimate photos without consent. This issue has gained complexity as technology evolves, making it easier for individuals to share such images widely.

Senator J.D. Mesnard, the architect of the original law, highlighted a significant challenge posed by advancements in artificial intelligence. He explained that new technology enables the creation of highly realistic nude images which, while not actual photographs of individuals, can be disseminated with the intent to harm.

Mesnard’s bill, SB1462, aims to address this emerging issue by explicitly including digitally generated images in the statute designed to combat harassment through such representations. He noted that these images, although not actual photographs, can still be used to inflict emotional distress, particularly on women.

Despite the intended purpose, the measure faced criticism from the Arizona chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU). Lobbyist Marilyn Rodriguez cautioned that the bill could infringe on First Amendment rights, pointing out that parodies or artistic expressions could potentially fall under its broad provisions.

Rodriguez emphasized that artistic and political expressions, even those deemed vulgar, are often protected under the Constitution, expressing skepticism about Mesnard’s intentions to restrict harmful uses without overreach.

In response to concerns, Mesnard agreed to incorporate exceptions for images produced in the public interest, including those related to scientific, educational, or newsworthy topics. Yet, criticisms from the ACLU remain regarding the harsh penalties associated with the measure, including the potential for a 2.5-year prison term.

Rodriguez cautioned that the bill’s broad scope could criminalize acts that are far less invasive than personal relationship breaches, putting young individuals at risk for significant legal repercussions for seemingly harmless actions.

The concerns extend beyond the ACLU, with Kathryn Krejci, a volunteer attorney with Arizona Attorney for Criminal Justice, arguing that SB1462 eliminates the existing requirement for prosecutors to demonstrate that individuals in the images had a reasonable expectation of privacy. This change raises fears of unjust legal ramifications for those who may share images lacking such expectations.

Mesnard clarified that this shift applies solely to AI-generated images. He asserted that since the people depicted did not consent to the creation of these works, they could not have a reasonable expectation of privacy.

However, skepticism about the bill persists among committee members, including Rep. Alexander Kolodin, who echoed Krejci’s concerns regarding the potential for individuals to face prosecution for sharing images without any reasonable expectation of privacy. Kolodin cited a hypothetical scenario where an individual could unknowingly become a target under the revised statute.

Having passed the Senate, the measure is now set for consideration by the full House, leaving lawmakers to weigh the balance between evolving technology and individual rights.