H.R. 633 (119th)Bill Overview

TAKE IT DOWN Act

Science, Technology, Communications|Child safety and welfareCrimes against children
Cosponsors
Support
Republican
Introduced
Jan 22, 2025
Discussions
Bill Text
Current stageCommittee

Placed on the Union Calendar, Calendar No. 59.

Introduced
Committee
Floor
President
Law
Congressional Activities
01 · The brief
Plain-English summaryWhat this bill actually does

The bill amends the Communications Act to criminalize knowingly publishing nonconsensual intimate images and AI-generated intimate “digital forgeries,” with higher penalties for minors. It requires covered platforms to implement a takedown process and remove reported nonconsensual intimate depictions within 48 hours, directs the FTC to enforce platform notice-and-removal obligations as unfair or deceptive practices, and defines covered platforms and key terms.

Why people may split

Liberals emphasize victim protection and rapid takedowns

Watch point

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive statutory package that is moderately well-constructed: it establishes clear prohibitions, detailed elements and penalties, a defined notice-and-removal process for covered platforms with specific timelines, and a named enforcement authority with cross-references to existing statutes for forfeiture and restitution.

The bill amends the Communications Act to criminalize knowingly publishing nonconsensual intimate images and AI-generated intimate “digital forgeries,” with higher penalties for minors.

It requires covered platforms to implement a takedown process and remove reported nonconsensual intimate depictions within 48 hours, directs the FTC to enforce platform notice-and-removal obligations as unfair or deceptive practices, and defines covered platforms and key terms.

The statute includes exceptions for law enforcement, medical or legal uses, and victim assistance, and provides for forfeiture, restitution, and protections for platforms that act in good faith.

Passage45/100

Policy appeals to privacy and anti-exploitation norms but raises free-speech, Section 230, and enforcement concerns that slow or alter final form.

CredibilityPartially aligned

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive statutory package that is moderately well-constructed: it establishes clear prohibitions, detailed elements and penalties, a defined notice-and-removal process for covered platforms with specific timelines, and a named enforcement authority with cross-references to existing statutes for forfeiture and restitution. It integrates closely with existing law and assigns responsibilities to identifiable actors.

Contention60/100

Liberals emphasize victim protection and rapid takedowns

02 · What it does

Who stands to gain, and who may push back.

Likely benefits vs burdens50% / 50%
Likely helpedLikely burdened

These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.

Likely helped
  • Potential benefitProvides criminal penalties to deter intentional publication of nonconsensual intimate depictions and digital forgeries.
  • Potential benefitCreates a mandatory takedown process, enabling faster removal of exploitative content from covered platforms.
  • Potential benefitAuthorizes restitution and forfeiture, potentially enabling victims to recover damages and illicit gains.
Likely burdened
  • Potential burdenImposes new compliance and content-moderation costs on covered platforms, especially smaller services.
  • Potential burdenMay incentivize cautious over-removal of lawful or newsworthy material to avoid FTC enforcement risk.
  • Potential burdenDefinitions like 'indistinguishable' and 'identifiable' could generate legal uncertainty and inconsistent application.
03 · Why people split

Why the argument around this bill splits.

Liberals emphasize victim protection and rapid takedowns
Progressive90%

Likely broadly supportive.

The bill strengthens criminal penalties for revenge porn and deepfake sexual images, mandates rapid takedowns, and holds platforms accountable for protecting victims.

It aligns with priorities on privacy, gendered harms, and addressing technology-enabled exploitation.

Leans supportive
Centrist70%

Generally favorable but cautious.

Appreciates victim protections and timeliness of takedowns while seeking clearer definitions, due-process safeguards, and predictable compliance costs for platforms.

Will watch implementation details and interaction with existing law.

Leans supportive
Conservative35%

Mixed to uneasy.

Values protecting victims of exploitation but worries about new federal criminal offenses, regulatory burdens on platforms, enforcement by the FTC, and potential chilling effects on speech and due process.

Prefers limited, narrowly tailored federal intervention.

Likely resistant
04 · Can it pass?

The path through Congress.

Introduced

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Committee

Reached or meaningfully advanced

Floor

Still ahead

President

Still ahead

Law

Still ahead

Passage likelihood45/100

Policy appeals to privacy and anti-exploitation norms but raises free-speech, Section 230, and enforcement concerns that slow or alter final form.

Scope and complexity
52%
Scopemoderate
52%
Complexitymedium
Why this could stall
  • Constitutional First Amendment challenges and scope.
  • Interaction and potential conflict with Section 230 case law.
05 · Recent votes

Recent votes on the bill.

No vote history yet

The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.

06 · Go deeper

Go deeper than the headline read.

Included on this page

Liberals emphasize victim protection and rapid takedowns

Policy appeals to privacy and anti-exploitation norms but raises free-speech, Section 230, and enforcement concerns that slow or alter fina…

Unlocked analysis

Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill is a substantive statutory package that is moderately well-constructed: it establishes clear prohibitions, detailed elements and penalties, a defined notice-and-remov…

Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.

Perspective breakdownsPassage barriersLegislative design reviewStakeholder impact map
Open full analysis