Bill Commons

CA SB 1142

in committee

Digital Dignity Act.

California · 2025-2026 Regular Session · upper

Follow this bill’s action updates (Atom)

Subscribe in a feed reader. The feed covers recorded actions from the last 30 days; Bill Commons may record an action after it happened at the legislature.

Quick answers

Did CA SB 1142 pass?

Not yet. CA SB 1142 is in committee and has not come to a final vote. Latest recorded action (2026-05-14): May 14 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

What is CA SB 1142 about?

Existing law prohibits the false impersonation of another person in either that person's personal or official capacity with the intent to steal or defraud, as specified. Existing law protects all people from defamation, including libel and slander, as provided. Existing law makes any person who knowingly uses another's name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness for commercial purposes, as specified, without that person's prior consent liable for damages, as specified. Existing law provides that a party seeking relief pursuant to those provisions may also seek an injunction or temporary restraining order according to specified procedures. This bill would enact the Digital Dignity Act. The act would subject to specified liability a person who, by distributing content with actual knowledge that the content includes a digital replica, is found guilty of violating a criminal provision for which false impersonation of another is a required element, as prescribed, or is found liable in a civil action arising from the use or portrayal through a digital replica, as provided. The Digital Dignity Act would require a large online platform that includes a generative AI tool, as defined, that provides users with the functionality to create a digital replica of other individuals to provide a mechanism for individuals to report content that violates the platform's terms of service or a provision of law relating to the individual's digital replica and to submit to the large online platform any certified court order or judgment ordering the removal of any content involving the individual's digital replica on the platform or finding that content involving the individual's digital replica was defamatory, fraudulent, or any other form of image appropriation not permitted by law, as prescribed. Upon receipt of the court order or judgment, the act would require the large online platform to remove the digital replica and make reasonable efforts to identify and remove any known identical copies. The act would authorize a city attorney or the Attorney General to bring a civil action to enforce these provisions and to seek a specified civil penalty and injunctive relief. The act would require a generative AI tool provider to maintain, for no less than 90 days, records sufficient to allow compliance with a court order issued pursuant to a civil action by the city attorney or Attorney General, as prescribed.

Who sponsors CA SB 1142?

Becker is the primary sponsor of CA SB 1142.

Description

Existing law prohibits the false impersonation of another person in either that person's personal or official capacity with the intent to steal or defraud, as specified. Existing law protects all people from defamation, including libel and slander, as provided. Existing law makes any person who knowingly uses another's name, voice, signature, photograph, or likeness for commercial purposes, as specified, without that person's prior consent liable for damages, as specified. Existing law provides that a party seeking relief pursuant to those provisions may also seek an injunction or temporary restraining order according to specified procedures. This bill would enact the Digital Dignity Act. The act would subject to specified liability a person who, by distributing content with actual knowledge that the content includes a digital replica, is found guilty of violating a criminal provision for which false impersonation of another is a required element, as prescribed, or is found liable in a civil action arising from the use or portrayal through a digital replica, as provided. The Digital Dignity Act would require a large online platform that includes a generative AI tool, as defined, that provides users with the functionality to create a digital replica of other individuals to provide a mechanism for individuals to report content that violates the platform's terms of service or a provision of law relating to the individual's digital replica and to submit to the large online platform any certified court order or judgment ordering the removal of any content involving the individual's digital replica on the platform or finding that content involving the individual's digital replica was defamatory, fraudulent, or any other form of image appropriation not permitted by law, as prescribed. Upon receipt of the court order or judgment, the act would require the large online platform to remove the digital replica and make reasonable efforts to identify and remove any known identical copies. The act would authorize a city attorney or the Attorney General to bring a civil action to enforce these provisions and to seek a specified civil penalty and injunctive relief. The act would require a generative AI tool provider to maintain, for no less than 90 days, records sufficient to allow compliance with a court order issued pursuant to a civil action by the city attorney or Attorney General, as prescribed.

Introduced
2026-02-18
Latest action
2026-05-14 — May 14 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.
Bill type
bill
Last updated
—

Subjects

Sponsors

  • Beckerauthor

Committees

Not provided by source.

Action timeline

Newest first

  1. 2026-05-14

    May 14 hearing: Held in committee and under submission.

  2. 2026-05-12

    Set for hearing May 14.

  3. 2026-05-11

    May 11 hearing: Placed on APPR. suspense file.

  4. 2026-05-04

    Set for hearing May 11.

  5. 2026-04-23

    Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.

    amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  6. 2026-04-22

    From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 12. Noes 0. Page 3978.) (April 21).

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee

  7. 2026-04-10

    Set for hearing April 21.

  8. 2026-04-08

    Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

    amendment-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  9. 2026-04-07

    From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on JUD. (Ayes 7. Noes 0. Page 3742.) (April 6).

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,committee-passage-favorable,referral-committee

  10. 2026-03-23

    From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on P., D.T., & C.P.

    amendment-passage,committee-passage,reading-1,reading-2,referral-committee

  11. 2026-03-10

    Set for hearing April 6.

  12. 2026-02-26

    Referred to Coms. on P., D.T., & C.P. and JUD.

    referral-committee

  13. 2026-02-19

    From printer. May be acted upon on or after March 21.

  14. 2026-02-18

    Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

    introduction,reading-1,referral-committee

Versions

  • 02/18/26 - Introduced — 2026-02-18Compare
  • 03/23/26 - Amended Senate — 2026-03-23Compare
  • 04/08/26 - Amended Senate — 2026-04-08Compare
  • 04/23/26 - Amended Senate — 2026-04-23Compare
  • SB1142Compare
  • (document, no version)Compare

Documents

Votes

  • Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Judiciary]

    2026-04-06 · pass · 7-0

    Member-level votes (9)
    • Reyes: yes
    • McNerney: yes
    • Wiener: yes
    • Cabaldon: yes
    • Padilla: yes
    • Gonzalez: yes
    • Umberg: yes
    • Jones: other
    • Ochoa Bogh: other

  • Do pass as amended, but first amend, and re-refer to the Committee on [Appropriations]

    2026-04-21 · pass · 12-0

    Member-level votes (13)
    • Reyes: yes
    • Ashby: yes
    • Durazo: yes
    • Laird: yes
    • Weber Pierson: yes
    • Umberg: yes
    • Caballero: yes
    • Allen: yes
    • Stern: yes
    • Wahab: yes
    • Wiener: yes
    • Niello: yes
    • Valladares: other

  • Placed on suspense file

    2026-05-11 · pass · 7-0

    Member-level votes (7)
    • Cabaldon: yes
    • Dahle: yes
    • Richardson: yes
    • Cervantes: yes
    • Grayson: yes
    • Seyarto: yes
    • Wahab: yes

Related bills

No related bills recorded for this bill.

Official source

http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB1142

Attribution

Data from openstates_bulk_csv, retrieved 2026-07-24T01:34:27.960412Z

Inspect retained evidence for changes recorded after evidence tracking began:

Source and document changesStatus and relationship changes

Session-wide evidence can include changes to other bills:

Bulk imports for this sessionSession dates and activity

Use this data

Every field on this page is available from the free public API — no key or licence required. Fetch this bill as JSON: GET /api/v1/bills?jurisdiction=CA&identifier=SB 1142. See the API docs or the MCP server for AI assistants.

Known limitations

  • Sponsor party and chamber affiliation are not yet captured by this API.
  • Committee referrals are not yet captured.
  • Some documents have no extracted text yet, so version comparison may be limited.

See the methodology page for data sources and limitations.