Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
Adds a federal civil cause of action for nonconsensual capture or broadcast of "intimate visual depictions," allows actual or liquidated damages ($150,000 per depiction), attorney’s fees, and injunctive relief. Defines consent, intimate depictions, reasonable expectation of privacy, and jurisdictional interstate-commerce triggers; excludes lawful law-enforcement surveillance under warrant.
Support for strong victim remedies vs concern about federal overreach
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill effectively establishes a new federal civil cause of action for nonconsensual capture and dissemination of intimate visual depictions with clear core elements (who may sue, mens rea, definitions, remedies, and interstate-commerce nexus), but it provides limited procedural and fiscal scaffolding.
Adds a federal civil cause of action for nonconsensual capture or broadcast of "intimate visual depictions," allows actual or liquidated damages ($150,000 per depiction), attorney’s fees, and injunctive relief.
Defines consent, intimate depictions, reasonable expectation of privacy, and jurisdictional interstate-commerce triggers; excludes lawful law-enforcement surveillance under warrant.
Content is protective and narrow so it has a plausible path, but federalization of tort liability and statutory damages create legal and political friction.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill effectively establishes a new federal civil cause of action for nonconsensual capture and dissemination of intimate visual depictions with clear core elements (who may sue, mens rea, definitions, remedies, and interstate-commerce nexus), but it provides limited procedural and fiscal scaffolding.
Support for strong victim remedies vs concern about federal overreach
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Support for strong victim remedies vs concern about federal overreach
Likely strongly supportive: bill creates a clear federal remedy for victims of video voyeurism and revenge porn, with significant damages and injunctive tools.
Pseudonymity and fees improve access to justice for survivors.
Generally favorable but cautious: the bill addresses a clear harm and gives courts remedies, yet raises questions about scope, mens rea, and potential litigation abuse.
Would favor clarifying language and guardrails.
Skeptical: sees this as federal expansion into areas traditionally handled by state tort and criminal law, with large damages and vague standards that could chill speech and journalism.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Content is protective and narrow so it has a plausible path, but federalization of tort liability and statutory damages create legal and political friction.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Support for strong victim remedies vs concern about federal overreach
Content is protective and narrow so it has a plausible path, but federalization of tort liability and statutory damages create legal and po…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill effectively establishes a new federal civil cause of action for nonconsensual capture and dissemination of intimate visual depictions with clear core elements (who ma…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.