S. 146 · 119th Congress
TAKE IT DOWN Act
Sen. Cruz, Ted [R-TX] (R-TX) · Introduced · 21 cosponsors
Latest action
Became Public Law No: 119-12.
· from Congress.gov, as of August 8, 2026
Committees
What this stage means
The bill is now law — by the President's signature, by the ten-day rule when the President declines to sign, or by a two-thirds veto override.
Why this matters
There are three constitutional paths to enactment, and only one of them requires the President's approval.
What can happen next
Executive agencies write regulations to implement it; courts may review challenges to it.
Study this bill
AP GovThe constitutional question
Can Congress criminalize publishing nonconsensual intimate images — including AI-generated deepfakes — and require platforms to remove them within 48 hours of notice, without the takedown machinery sweeping in protected speech (overbreadth) or operating as a prior restraint?
The strongest case for
Nonconsensual intimate imagery is a devastating, targeted harm — overwhelmingly against women and minors — and AI generation made it manufacturable against anyone with a photograph. Forty-nine states had criminal laws, but the internet does not respect state lines; victims needed one national floor and, crucially, a removal mechanism, because prosecution after the fact does nothing while the images spread. The First Amendment has never protected obscenity, true threats, or child sexual abuse material; images whose entire harm is the absence of consent fit the tradition of narrow, well-defined unprotected categories. It passed the Senate unanimously and the House 409–2 — a genuine moral consensus, not a moral panic.
The strongest case against
The goal is unimpeachable; the machinery is the problem. A 48-hour takedown deadline backed by federal enforcement gives platforms one rational strategy: remove first, never investigate — and notice-and-takedown systems are abused today by people targeting criticism, journalism, and satire. The statute's definitions must distinguish a deepfake from protected parody and an intimate image from newsworthy evidence (a war crime photo, a politician's misconduct), lines that are easy in statutes and hard at scale. Because the removal obligation operates before any judicial finding, it functions as a privatized prior restraint of exactly the kind New York Times v. United States condemned when the government tried it directly.
Foundational documents in play
- U.S. Constitution
The First Amendment is the measuring stick for any federal law criminalizing a category of images and compelling platforms to remove content.
Required cases in play
- Schenck v. United States (1919)
Schenck established that speech protection has limits — the question is whether nonconsensual intimate imagery falls outside protection like other unprotected categories.
- New York Times Co. v. United States (1971)
The Pentagon Papers' heavy presumption against prior restraint is the strongest objection to government-mandated 48-hour takedown systems.
Organizations supporting
Organizations opposing
This has happened before
The SHIELD Act, introduced repeatedly from 2016 through the 118th Congress, tried to criminalize the same conduct and never reached a floor vote. What changed: AI deepfakes turned a 'niche' harm universal, and first-lady advocacy gave it a champion with agenda-setting power. The states-first pattern — 49 state laws, then a federal floor — is the classic federalism laboratory sequence.
Practice FRQ
SCOTUS Comparison. The TAKE IT DOWN Act criminalizes publication of nonconsensual intimate images and requires platforms to remove them within 48 hours of a valid request. (A) Identify the First Amendment principle common to challenges against this act and Schenck v. United States (1919). (B) Explain how the reasoning in Schenck could be used to defend the act's constitutionality. (C) Describe one way the act's takedown requirement raises a concern Schenck did not address.
Sources: www.congress.gov
Action history
Every recorded action from Congress.gov — 23 total.
Presented to President.
House
Presented to President.
Signed by President.
Signed by President.
Became Public Law No: 119-12.
Became Public Law No: 119-12.
House
Mr. Bilirakis moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.
House
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H1644-1643)
House
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on S. 146.
House
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.
House
Considered as unfinished business. (consideration: CR H1669)
House
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)
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)
House
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
House
Received in the House.
House
Held at the desk.
Senate
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate
Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation discharged by Unanimous Consent.
Senate
Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent.
Senate
Passed Senate without amendment by Unanimous Consent. (consideration: CR S988; text: CR S988-990)
Senate
Message on Senate action sent to the House.
Senate
Introduced in Senate
Senate
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.