Oklahoma Ethics Commission weighs AI disclosure rules for political ads

Oklahoma's Ethics Commission is developing rules to address AI-generated content in political campaigns, balancing voter information needs against constitutional free speech protections as litigation in other states tests the legal boundaries.

At a September 10, 2026 meeting, commission members discussed whether to require disclosures when campaigns use AI-generated deepfakes of candidates in advertisements, mailers, and other political messaging. Executive Director Lee Anne Bruce Boone told commissioners the central challenge is defining what triggers disclosure requirements.

"Are we trying to disclose any use of artificial intelligence? Or are we trying to really disclose somebody who is doing a realistic fabrication that depicts a candidate engaging in speech or conduct that never occurred?" Bruce Boone said, according to reporting by KOSU.

Why it matters

Oklahoma joins more than 30 states attempting to regulate AI political content without clear Supreme Court guidance on where disclosure requirements cross into unconstitutional compelled speech. The commission's approach could set precedent for how states protect electoral integrity while preserving First Amendment rights in an era of synthetic media.

Legal landscape remains unsettled

Bruce Boone emphasized that existing campaign finance disclosure precedents from Buckley v. Valeo (1976) and Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission (2010) don't clearly address mandatory AI labels in political advertising. The commission is monitoring two active cases that illustrate the constitutional tensions.

In California, a federal district court permanently blocked AB 2839, which banned deepfakes of candidates 120 days before elections and required disclaimers on AI-manipulated political content. The court ruled in August 2025 that the law was "well-intentioned but constitutionally infirm," favoring counter-speech and fact-checking over content restrictions.

Meanwhile, Minnesota's HF 1370 remains in effect after surviving an initial challenge. That law prohibits deepfakes published 90 days before elections without consent and with intent to injure candidates or influence outcomes. The case is back in district court after an Eighth Circuit appeal.

Oklahoma's path forward

Bruce Boone told commissioners that "a legitimate governmental objective does not eliminate the need for narrow drafting when political speech is involved." She presented the legal landscape without recommending specific rule language, leaving the commission to determine how to proceed.

The commission faces a February 2, 2027 deadline if it intends to propose new rules to state lawmakers during the next legislative session. Bruce Boone said the goal is protecting voters' right to informed decision-making while safeguarding political speech rights.

"The problem is Oklahomans are seeing ads and hearing claims that are untrue, and there is no telling how that might be impacting their choices at the ballot," she said.

The commission has spent months debating whether to require disclosures or ban AI-generated political content entirely. The ongoing litigation in California and Minnesota will likely inform Oklahoma's final approach as courts continue defining constitutional boundaries for regulating synthetic political media.

These details were first reported by Lionel Ramos for KOSU.