NO FAKES Act Advances Out of Senate Committee: Federal AI Voice and Likeness Right Explained (2026)

The Senate Judiciary Committee voted on June 18, 2026 to advance the NO FAKES Act, a bill that would create the first federal right over AI-generated replicas of a person's voice and visual likeness and could expose online platforms to up to $750,000 per work. The bill has cleared committee but is not law.

Information last verified on June 21, 2026. This is a developing story; we update it as the record changes.

Status: S.4591 was ordered reported out of the Senate Judiciary Committee by voice vote on June 18, 2026. It has NOT passed the full Senate or the House and has NOT been signed into law. It is a pending bill, not enacted law.

Jurisdiction scope: This article explains a pending federal bill, the NO FAKES Act, and how it would relate to existing state digital-replica laws. It does not state current law beyond the bill's status and is not legal advice. For state rules, see deepfake and AI voice cloning laws by state.

What Happened

At its Executive Business Meeting on June 18, 2026, the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to advance S.4591, the NO FAKES Act of 2026. The full name is the Nurture Originals, Foster Art, and Keep Entertainment Safe Act. The committee approved the bill by voice vote, sending it toward consideration by the full Senate. Three Republican members, Senators Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, and Eric Schmitt, raised First Amendment concerns during the markup, but the committee advanced the measure.

Clearing committee is one step in a long process. To become law, the bill would still need to pass the full Senate, pass the House of Representatives, and be signed by the President. None of those steps has happened. The version that advanced is an amended text reported by the committee, and the bill's language can change as it moves.

The NO FAKES Act has been building for two sessions of Congress, with earlier versions introduced in prior years and a companion bill in the House. It is backed by parts of the music and entertainment industries, which have pressed for federal protection against AI-generated imitations of performers, and it is opposed in part by technology industry groups that warn about its breadth and its effect on online platforms.

What the Bill Would Do

The core of S.4591 is a new federal property right in a person's voice and visual likeness, specifically as against unauthorized AI-generated replicas. The bill defines a "digital replica" as a newly created, computer-generated, highly realistic electronic representation that is readily identifiable as the voice or visual likeness of a real individual, embodied in a sound recording, image, or audiovisual work in which the actual individual did not perform or appear, or a version of a real performance whose fundamental character has been materially altered. The definition excludes certain authorized reproductions, sampling, remixing, and remastering.

The right would be licensable during a person's life and would descend to heirs for up to 70 years after death, a structure that resembles how some intellectual property and state right-of-publicity interests pass to estates. The bill prohibits producing or distributing an unauthorized digital replica and offering a product or service primarily designed to create them.

The remedies are tiered. An individual who creates or distributes an unauthorized digital replica could face statutory damages of at least $5,000 per work, or actual damages. An online service provider that makes good-faith efforts to comply could face statutory damages of up to $25,000 per work. A provider that does not make those efforts could be liable for $5,000 per unauthorized display or transmission, with damages capped at $750,000 per work. The bill pairs that exposure with a safe harbor: a provider that adopts and discloses a policy for terminating repeat violators, and that responds promptly to takedown notifications, can limit its liability. That notice-and-takedown design is the part most directly aimed at platforms.

Analysis: Why This Matters

The following is analysis from the Recording Law Editorial Team.

The NO FAKES Act is significant because it would federalize an area that states have been filling in piecemeal. The site already tracks state deepfake and digital-replica statutes, and several states have enacted voice-and-likeness protections, including measures aimed at AI imitations of performers. A federal right would create a national floor and a single cause of action, rather than a patchwork that varies by state. That is the central appeal to its backers and the central worry to its critics, who argue a broad federal right plus platform liability could chill lawful expression and burden online services.

The First Amendment objections raised in committee are not incidental. A right that lets a person control AI representations of their voice and likeness runs directly into protected speech, including parody, commentary, and news. How the bill's exclusions and any free-speech defenses are drafted will determine whether it survives constitutional scrutiny and how it operates in practice. Those details are exactly what can change as the text moves through the full Senate and the House.

We are not predicting whether the bill will pass, how it would be amended, or how courts would treat it. The point of covering it now is that committee passage is a concrete, datable milestone for the most-watched AI-likeness bill in Congress, and readers searching for what the NO FAKES Act does deserve an accurate account of its current status: advanced out of committee, not enacted, with its key provisions and its open constitutional questions both still in play.

What Happens Next

Several steps would have to occur before the NO FAKES Act becomes law. First, the full Senate would need to schedule and pass the bill, potentially with floor amendments. Second, the House would need to pass its own version, and any differences between the chambers would need to be reconciled. Third, the President would need to sign the final bill. Any of those steps could change the text, delay it, or stop it.

The event that would convert this explainer into hard news is enactment, meaning a bill signed into law, or a decisive vote in either chamber. Until then, the NO FAKES Act remains a proposal, and current liability for AI-generated voice and likeness imitations is governed by existing state statutes and other federal and state laws, not by S.4591.

This is general legal information, not legal advice. It explains a pending federal bill, the NO FAKES Act, and reflects sources verified on June 21, 2026. The bill is not law, the text can change, and you should consult a lawyer licensed in your jurisdiction about your specific situation.

Sources

• S.4591, NO FAKES Act of 2026, 119th Congress, bill text (Congress.gov): https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/4591/text
• U.S. Senate Committee on the Judiciary, Executive Business Meeting, June 18, 2026: https://www.judiciary.senate.gov/committee-activity/hearings/executive-business-meeting-06-18-2026

Related articles

• Deepfake and AI voice cloning laws by state
• California deepfake laws
• New York deepfake laws
• Washington's AI deepfake likeness law takes effect
• New York's synthetic performer AI ad law

---

Last updated: 2026-06-21. This is a developing story; details verified as of 2026-06-21.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is the NO FAKES Act law?

No. As of June 21, 2026, the NO FAKES Act (S.4591) has only advanced out of the Senate Judiciary Committee, by a June 18, 2026 voice vote. It has not passed the full Senate or the House and has not been signed, so it is a pending bill, not enacted law.

What right would the NO FAKES Act create?

It would create the first federal property right in an individual's AI-generated voice and visual likeness, allowing a person to control unauthorized digital replicas. The right would be licensable and would pass to heirs for up to 70 years after death.

How much could platforms be liable for?

Under the bill, an online service provider that does not make good-faith compliance efforts could be liable for $5,000 per unauthorized display or transmission, capped at $750,000 per work. A provider that does make such efforts could face up to $25,000 per work. Individuals could face at least $5,000 per work or actual damages.

What is a 'digital replica' under the bill?

It is defined as a newly created, computer-generated, highly realistic representation readily identifiable as a real person's voice or visual likeness, in a work where the person did not actually perform, or a real performance whose fundamental character has been materially altered. Certain authorized reproductions, sampling, remixing, and remastering are excluded.

Why do some senators oppose it?

Senators Mike Lee, Ted Cruz, and Eric Schmitt raised First Amendment concerns during the committee vote, and technology industry groups have warned the bill is broad and could affect lawful expression and online platforms. The committee advanced it despite those objections.

How would it affect state deepfake laws?

If enacted, the federal right would layer on top of existing state digital-replica and deepfake statutes rather than replace them. Because the bill is not law, those state statutes currently govern AI voice and likeness imitations.