Minnesota Deepfake Laws: AI Images, Voice Cloning & Penalties (2026)

Minnesota is one of the country's most active states on deepfake regulation. It enacted criminal bans on both sexual and election deepfakes in 2023, and in 2026 Governor Walz signed the nation's first law banning nudification apps. If you create, share, or host a non-consensual AI-generated image or audio clip in Minnesota, you face criminal charges, civil liability, or both.

Is It Illegal to Make a Deepfake of Someone in Minnesota?

Yes, in three distinct situations. Minnesota targets deepfakes across three buckets: (1) sexual and intimate imagery involving adults, (2) election-related content, and (3) nudification technology. What the state does not cover is general commercial voice cloning outside the intimate or election context: there is no Tennessee ELVIS Act-style right-of-publicity statute aimed at AI voice simulation for entertainment or advertising purposes.

For each covered category, the critical question is intent and consent: did the depicted person agree, and did the creator or sharer intend to harm, harass, profit, or influence an election? Absence of consent is not enough on its own: dissemination must be intentional.

Minnesota's recording laws address wiretapping and audio capture, while deepfake laws govern synthetic media created after the fact. The two frameworks are complementary, not overlapping.

Sexual and Intimate Deepfakes

Minn. Stat. § 617.262 is Minnesota's core sexual deepfake criminal statute. It prohibits the intentional dissemination of a deep fake when the actor knows or reasonably should know the depicted individual did not consent, the content realistically depicts intimate parts or sexual acts, and the depicted individual is identifiable from the content or accompanying personal information.

The statute defines "deep fake" broadly: any video, film, sound recording, image, or technological representation of speech or conduct that is so realistic a reasonable person would believe it depicts actual events, created through technical means rather than impersonation. That definition captures AI-generated images, audio clips, and video, not just video face-swaps.

The base penalty is a gross misdemeanor. The offense escalates to a felony carrying up to three years imprisonment and a $5,000 fine when aggravating factors apply, including: the victim suffered financial loss, the actor intended to profit from the deepfake, the actor posted it on a website or maintained an online platform to disseminate it, the actor obtained it through theft or identity theft, the actor intended to harass the victim, or the actor had a prior conviction under the same chapter.

On the civil side, Minn. Stat. § 604.32 (enacted alongside the criminal statute in 2023) provides a civil cause of action specifically for nonconsensual dissemination of a deep fake depicting intimate parts or sexual acts. Victims may recover general and special damages including financial losses and mental anguish, the defendant's profits, a civil penalty up to $100,000, court costs, attorney fees, and injunctive relief. A separate statute, § 604.31, covers real (non-synthetic) private sexual images.

HF 1606 (effective August 1, 2026) extends protection further. It bans access to nudification apps (software that transforms a clothed photo into a fabricated nude image) and gives survivors a private right of action against app owners. The Attorney General may collect fines of $500,000 per violation. This is the first law of its kind in the United States.

For minors, Minn. Stat. § 617.246 covers child pornography and expressly reaches images "created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexual conduct," which encompasses AI-generated child sexual abuse material. Federal law under 18 U.S.C. § 2256(8)(B) provides a parallel federal prohibition.

Election and Political Deepfakes

Minn. Stat. § 609.771 prohibits spreading a deep fake (or contracting someone to do so) when the person knows or recklessly disregards that it is a deep fake, acts without the depicted individual's consent, and intends to injure a candidate or influence an election. The prohibition applies during two windows: within 90 days before a party nominating convention, or after absentee voting begins for any primary or general election.

The penalty structure has three tiers. A standard violation carries up to 90 days imprisonment or a $1,000 fine, or both. If the actor intended to cause violence, the penalty rises to 364 days or a $3,000 fine. A repeat conviction within five years brings up to 5 years imprisonment or a $10,000 fine. A candidate convicted under the statute must forfeit their nomination or office and is disqualified from holding future office.

The Attorney General, county and city attorneys, the depicted individual, and injured candidates may all seek injunctive or equitable relief in court. The 2024 amendments (2024 c 112 art 2 ss 76-78) refined the timing and penalty provisions.

Two federal lawsuits challenge § 609.771 on First Amendment grounds. In Kohls v. Ellison, a political commentator challenged the statute after posting an AI-generated parody video depicting Vice President Harris. The Eighth Circuit affirmed denial of a preliminary injunction on February 9, 2026, finding the commentator lacked standing because his content was clearly labeled as parody and therefore fell outside the statute's reach. A co-plaintiff legislator also failed to secure preliminary relief due to a 16-month delay in filing. In X Corp. v. Ellison, X challenged the law as applied to social media platforms. On December 2, 2025, the district court dismissed X's Section 230 preemption claim and denied its motion for a preliminary injunction for lack of standing. Both cases remain in active litigation on the merits.

Election deepfake laws carry ongoing First Amendment risk nationwide. California's AB 2839 was struck down in its entirety and permanently enjoined by a federal court on August 29, 2025, in Kohls v. Bonta on free-speech grounds. Minnesota's § 609.771 has survived preliminary injunction challenges so far, but the merits remain unresolved.

For broader context on AI regulation beyond deepfakes, see Minnesota AI Laws, which covers the state's AI governance framework, algorithmic accountability, and generative AI policies in employment and government.

AI Voice Cloning and Digital Likeness

Minnesota's § 617.262 expressly covers "sound recordings" within its definition of deep fake, meaning AI-cloned audio depicting someone in sexual or intimate content without consent is subject to the same criminal penalties as video deepfakes. That coverage is narrowly scoped to intimate contexts.

Outside that context, Minnesota has no stand-alone ELVIS Act-style statute extending right-of-publicity protections specifically to AI voice cloning for commercial or entertainment purposes. Tennessee's ELVIS Act (Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-25-1101 et seq., effective July 1, 2024) remains the national archetype for voice-clone legislation: it covers any AI simulation of a person's voice for commercial purposes without consent. Minnesota has not enacted equivalent protection as of June 2026.

Minnesota's data privacy laws under the Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act (MCDPA, Minn. Stat. ch. 325M) may provide indirect avenues where biometric data (including voiceprints) is collected to train AI models without proper consent disclosures. See also Minnesota biometric privacy laws for the biometric consent framework.

Federal Law That Applies in Minnesota

The TAKE IT DOWN Act (Public Law 119-12, signed May 19, 2025) is the first federal criminal law specifically targeting non-consensual intimate deepfakes. It applies in every state, including Minnesota, and operates alongside state law. Knowingly publishing non-consensual intimate visual depictions of adults or minors (expressly including AI-generated "digital forgeries") is a federal crime punishable by up to two years imprisonment (three years for content involving minors). Platforms must remove flagged content within 48 hours of receiving a victim's notice; the FTC enforces the removal obligations.

The DEFIANCE Act (S.1837, 119th Congress) would create a federal civil cause of action for victims of sexual deepfakes with liquidated damages up to $150,000 ($250,000 if the conduct involved actual or attempted sexual assault, stalking, or harassment). The Senate passed it by unanimous consent on January 13, 2026, but it remains pending in the House and is not yet law.

The NO FAKES Act (S.1367, 119th Congress) would create a federal right of publicity covering unauthorized AI digital replicas of voice and likeness. It has not passed either chamber as of June 2026 and remains a proposal only.

The FCC ruled in February 2024 (FCC 24-17) that AI-generated voices in robocalls are "artificial" voices under the TCPA, making AI voice-clone robocalls to phones without prior express consent illegal nationwide. The FTC's Impersonation Rule (16 CFR Part 461, effective April 1, 2024) prohibits deceptive impersonation of government entities and businesses using AI voice cloning. Federal CSAM law under 18 U.S.C. § 2256(8)(B) covers AI-generated images indistinguishable from real minors regardless of any state law gaps.

What Victims Can Do

A victim of a sexual deepfake in Minnesota has several paths. On the criminal side, report to local law enforcement and reference Minn. Stat. § 617.262. Prosecutors can charge the distributor directly; no minimum financial loss threshold is required for the base gross misdemeanor.

On the civil side, Minn. Stat. § 604.32 allows a deepfake victim to sue for damages including financial losses, mental anguish, and attorney fees, plus a civil penalty up to $100,000. Once HF 1606 takes effect on August 1, 2026, victims of nudification apps can also sue the app owners directly under the new statute.

For platform takedowns, the TAKE IT DOWN Act requires covered platforms to remove flagged non-consensual intimate deepfakes within 48 hours of a victim's notice. That federal 48-hour removal right is available to Minnesota residents now, regardless of which platform hosts the content.

For election deepfakes, the depicted individual (not only the candidate) can seek injunctive relief under § 609.771. The Attorney General's office also has standing to act.

Penalties at a Glance

Disclaimer: This page provides general legal information about Minnesota deepfake laws and is not legal advice. Deepfake legislation is evolving rapidly; statutes and court interpretations may change after publication. If you have been harmed by a deepfake or face charges, consult a licensed Minnesota attorney.

More Minnesota Laws

• Minnesota AI Meeting Recording Laws
• Minnesota Alimony Laws
• Minnesota At-Will Employment Laws
• Minnesota Car Accident Laws
• Minnesota Car Seat Laws
• Minnesota Child Custody Laws
• Minnesota Child Support Laws
• Minnesota Common Law Marriage Laws
• Minnesota Data Privacy Laws
• Minnesota Divorce Laws
• Minnesota Dog Bite Laws
• Minnesota Emancipation Laws
• Minnesota Expungement Laws
• Minnesota Hit and Run Laws
• Minnesota Landlord-Tenant Laws
• Minnesota Lemon Laws

For the full 50-state comparison, see Deepfake and AI Voice Cloning Laws by State.

Sources

This page cites primary legal sources including the Minnesota Revisor of Statutes, the United States Congress, and federal regulatory agencies. The site renders full citations below.