A Republican bill with 11 Democratic cosponsors · See all 21 cosponsors
Last activity — Became Public Law No: 119-12.
Became law
Passed both chambers and was signed by the President, or became law without a signature.
Nothing more in Congress: it is law. When it takes effect depends on the dates written into it — some parts start at once, others a year or more later.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- Passed Senate unanimous consent
- Passed House 409–2
- To President
- Became Law
The Senate by unanimous consent (no one objected, so there was no vote): no senator's position on it was recorded.
What this bill would do
The "TAKE IT DOWN Act" makes it illegal to knowingly publish nonconsensual intimate visual depictions or digital forgeries (deepfakes) of individuals using interactive computer services. It sets specific criminal penalties, including fines and imprisonment, for these acts and for threatening to commit them. The law also requires "covered platforms" to create a clear process for victims to report and request the removal of such content. Once a valid request is made, platforms must remove the content and identical copies within 48 hours. The Federal Trade Commission is tasked with enforcing these removal requirements.
Yes· 3 of 17
- Scored +8
Would children be better off under this?
The bill specifically protects minors from the publication of intimate visual depictions and digital forgeries.
- Scored +7
Would women be better off under this?
Women are disproportionately affected by nonconsensual intimate visual depictions, so the bill benefits them more.
- Scored +7
Does this protect people from being watched or searched?
The primary goal of this bill is to improve privacy rights by protecting individuals from the nonconsensual sharing of intimate visual depictions.
The opposite
- Scored -2
Does this protect what people are allowed to say in public life?
The takedown provisions could lead to censorship, thereby limiting freedom of speech.
What Congress actually voted on
One recorded vote has been taken on this bill.
- The House: a fast-track vote, needing two-thirds to pass The House sets aside its normal procedure to move quickly: no amendments, little debate, and a two-thirds bar instead of a simple majority. It is used for measures expected to be uncontroversial, so a bill that fails here failed despite broad expectations that it would not. Passed 409 yes · 2 no
04/28/2025 · Roll call 104 · recorded as “On Motion to Suspend the Rules and Pass”
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Criminal Penalties for Nonconsensual Content: The bill establishes that publishing nonconsensual intimate images or digital forgeries is unlawful, providing legal recourse for victims. This includes prison terms of up to 2 years for adults and 3 years for offenses involving minors (Section 2(h)(4)).
-
Protection Against Deepfakes: By specifically defining and prohibiting "digital forgery," the bill protects people from computer-generated intimate depictions that look authentic (Section 2(h)(3)).
-
Fast Removal of Harmful Content: Covered platforms must remove reported nonconsensual intimate visual depictions within 48 hours of a valid request, helping to limit the spread of harmful images (Section 3(a)(3)).
-
Protection from Extortion: The bill criminalizes threats to publish these images for the purpose of coercion, intimidation, or extortion (Section 2(h)(6)).
-
Financial Recovery: The law allows the court to order restitution for victims of these offenses (Section 2(h)(8)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Criminal Penalties: Individuals found in violation of the act face fines and imprisonment (Section 2(h)(4)).
-
Forfeiture of Property: People convicted under this act must forfeit any property used to commit the violation or any proceeds gained from it (Section 2(h)(7)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would children be better off under this? — The bill specifically protects minors from the publication of intimate visual depictions and digital forgeries. Would women be better off under this? — Women are disproportionately affected by nonconsensual intimate visual depictions, so the bill benefits them more. Would people in their twenties and thirties be better off under this? — The bill offers protection against nonconsensual sharing of intimate images, which is likely to impact young adults. Would people in middle age be better off under this? — Middle-aged individuals may benefit from the protection against nonconsensual sharing of intimate images. Would students be better off under this? — Students, especially young students are heavily online so protecting this group from intimate visual depictions is a benefit. Would men be better off under this? — Men may benefit from the protection against nonconsensual sharing of intimate images. Would high-income households be better off under this? — The bill provides legal recourse to victims regardless of income level. Would households on low incomes be better off under this? — The bill provides legal recourse to victims regardless of income level. Would middle-income households be better off under this? — The bill provides legal recourse to victims regardless of income level. Would people over 65 be better off under this? — Seniors may benefit from the protection against nonconsensual sharing of intimate images, especially regarding digital forgeries.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this protect people from being watched or searched? — The primary goal of this bill is to improve privacy rights by protecting individuals from the nonconsensual sharing of intimate visual depictions. Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal power by creating federal crimes related to the disclosure of nonconsensual intimate visual depictions.
- Education And Technology
- Does this give people more control over their personal data? — The bill aims to improve data privacy by giving individuals more control over their intimate visual depictions online. Does this put more rules on large technology companies? — This bill mandates specific actions from covered platforms, representing a form of regulation for big tech.
- Economy And Finance
- Does this give people more protection from unfair business practices? — The bill improves consumer protection by requiring online platforms to remove nonconsensual intimate visual depictions.
- Healthcare
- Does this make mental health care easier to get? — By protecting individuals from the harm caused by nonconsensual intimate visual depictions, the bill could lead to some small improvement in mental health.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this narrow the gap between how men and women are treated? — This bill can improve gender equality because nonconsensual intimate visual depictions disproportionately affect women. Does this protect what people are allowed to say in public life? — The takedown provisions could lead to censorship, thereby limiting freedom of speech.
- Public Law (5/20/2025)
The text as it became law
- Enrolled Bill
The final version, on its way to the President
- 5/19/2025
- Presented to President.
- Signed by President.
- Became Public Law No: 119-12.
- 4/28/2025
- Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
- Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 409 - 2 (Roll no. 104). (text: CR H1644-1645: 1)
- On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill Agreed to by the Yeas and Nays: (2/3 required): 409 - 2 (Roll no. 104). (text: CR H1644-1645)
- Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1669)
- At the conclusion of debate, the Yeas and Nays were demanded and ordered. Pursuant to the provisions of clause 8, rule XX, the Chair announced that further proceedings on the motion would be postponed.
- DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 146.
- Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1644-1643)
- Mr. Bilirakis moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
- 2/14/2025
- Held at the desk.
- Received in the House.
- 2/13/2025
- Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation discharged by Unanimous Consent.
- Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
- Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S988; text: CR S988-990)
- Message on Senate action sent to the House.
- 2/6/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 2/5/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/21/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/16/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.
- 18 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Marsha BlackburnRepublican · Tennessee
John BarrassoRepublican · Wyoming
Richard BlumenthalDemocrat · Connecticut
Cory BookerDemocrat · New Jersey
Ted BuddRepublican · North Carolina
Shelley CapitoRepublican · West Virginia
Bill CassidyRepublican · Louisiana
Catherine Cortez MastoDemocrat · Nevada
John CurtisRepublican · Utah
John HickenlooperDemocrat · Colorado
Martin HeinrichDemocrat · New Mexico
Amy KlobucharDemocrat · Minnesota
Cynthia LummisRepublican · Wyoming
Gary PetersDemocrat · Michigan
Jacky RosenDemocrat · Nevada
Adam SchiffDemocrat · California
Jeanne ShaheenDemocrat · New Hampshire
Tim SheehyRepublican · Montana
Roger WickerRepublican · Mississippi
Raphael WarnockDemocrat · Georgia
Todd YoungRepublican · Indiana