Compliance

Injunctive Relief

A judicial order to stop an action, such as distributing deceptive media.

How the laws define this

Courts issue injunctive relief as a judicial, civil, or equitable remedy that compels a party to perform a specific action or refrain from a particular activity, preventing ongoing or future harm rather than compensating for past harm. While these authorities share this foundational definition, they diverge in their specific regulatory applications. Michigan Election Law §168.932f, Arizona HB 2394, California AB 730, California AB 2839, Idaho HB 664, and Nevada AB 73 focus on using injunctive relief to stop the publication, dissemination, or distribution of deceptive media and deepfakes. In contrast, California AB 2655 empowers authorized parties to seek court orders compelling non-compliant large online platforms to enforce blocking or labeling requirements. Furthermore, AN ACT amending Tennessee Code Annotated uniquely distinguishes between prohibitory and mandatory injunctions, whereas AN ACT concerning responsive generative communication to a child emphasizes equitable relief specifically designed to prevent future harm.

Synthesised from the 9 statutory definitions below. Each one is quoted in full, with its source.

How jurisdictions differ

What is distinctive in each definition, binding law in force first. Showing 9 of the 10 instruments that define this term; all are listed under Definitions below.

Jurisdiction	Instrument	Status	What is distinctive
Michigan, United States	Distribution of materially deceptive media; prohibition; violation; misdemeanor; penalties; injunctive relief; definitions (Michigan Election Law §168.932f) — Public Act 265 of 2023 (HB 5144)	In Force	Specifies prevention of distribution of materially deceptive media within 90 days of an election without disclaimers, classifying violation as misdemeanor.
Arizona, United States	Arizona HB 2394 - Deepfake Disclosure Requirements	In Force	Limits to severe cases, compelling removal or cessation of publication of digital impersonation depicting political candidates or state residents.
California, United States	California AB 730 - Deceptive Audio/Visual Media in Elections	In Force (Amended)	Explicitly prohibits distribution of deceptive media, particularly deepfakes of political candidates within 60 days of an election.
Nevada, United States	Nevada AB 73 - Deepfakes Regulation	In Force	Allows a candidate depicted in an undisclosed deepfake to seek court order preventing further publication or dissemination of the content.
New Hampshire, United States	AN ACT criminalizing and creating a private right of action for the facilitation, encouragement, offer, solicitation, or recommendation of certain acts or actions through a responsive generative communication to a child.	In Force	Frames as equitable remedy to prevent future harm, in context of generative AI communications encouraging harmful acts to children.
Tennessee, United States	AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 29; Title 33; Title 39 and Title 47, relative to artificial intelligence.	Under Review	Distinguishes prohibitory injunction to stop activity and mandatory injunction to perform act, for AI trained to encourage self-harm, crime, or deception.
California, United States	California AB 2655 - Defending Democracy from Deepfake Deception Act of 2024	In Force	Enables authorized parties to seek court order against large online platforms to enforce blocking or labeling of deceptive AI-generated content.
California, United States	California AB 2839 - Deceptive Election Content	In Force	Targets order to stop distribution of materially deceptive AI-generated media falsely portraying candidates or election officials near elections.
California, United States	California SB 1111 — Digital Replicas	Awaiting Entry	Broadens to equitable relief requiring removal, recall, or cessation of unauthorized digital replicas, preserving access to temporary restraining orders.

What it triggers

In Michigan, it prohibits distribution of materially deceptive media within 90 days of an election without disclaimers.source
Under Arizona HB 2394, in severe cases it orders removal or cessation of publication of unauthorized deepfakes.source
Under California AB 730, it prohibits distribution of deceptive media within 60 days of an election.source
Under Nevada AB 73, it enables candidates depicted in undisclosed deepfakes to prevent further publication.source

Definitions (10)

A judicial remedy issued by a court that compels a party to do or refrain from specific acts, in this context, to prevent the distribution of materially deceptive media.

Distribution of materially deceptive media; prohibition; violation; misdemeanor; penalties; injunctive relief; definitions (Michigan Election Law §168.932f) — Public Act 265 of 2023 (HB 5144)Definition 1 of 10

A civil remedy involving a court order that compels a party to either perform a specific action or refrain from a specific action. Under HB 2394, it can be used to order the removal or cessation of publication of a digital impersonation in severe cases.

Arizona HB 2394 - Deepfake Disclosure RequirementsDefinition 2 of 10

A court order requiring a party to do or refrain from doing a specific act. In the context of AB 730, it refers to prohibiting the distribution of deceptive media.

California AB 730 - Deceptive Audio/Visual Media in ElectionsDefinition 3 of 10

Injunctive relief is a judicial remedy that compels a party to do or refrain from doing a specific act. Under AB 2655, it allows authorized parties to seek a court order against non-compliant large online platforms to enforce the Act's blocking or labeling requirements.

California AB 2655 - Defending Democracy from Deepfake Deception Act of 2024Definition 4 of 10

A judicial remedy in the form of a court order requiring a party to do or refrain from doing a specific act. Under AB 2839, it refers to an order to stop the distribution of materially deceptive election content.

California AB 2839 - Deceptive Election ContentDefinition 5 of 10

In the context of HB 664, injunctive relief is a civil remedy where a court orders an information content provider to stop the publication or continued dissemination of deceptive synthetic media. This legal tool is vital for preventing immediate and ongoing harm during an election campaign.

Idaho HB 664 - Deepfakes in ElectionsDefinition 6 of 10

Injunctive relief is a judicial remedy that compels a party to either perform a specific action or cease a particular activity. In the context of AB 73, it allows a candidate depicted in an undisclosed deepfake to seek a court order to prevent the further publication or dissemination of the deceptive content.

Nevada AB 73 - Deepfakes RegulationDefinition 7 of 10

Injunctive relief is a judicial remedy that compels a defendant to either stop engaging in a particular activity (prohibitory injunction) or to perform a specific act (mandatory injunction), often used to prevent ongoing harm or ensure compliance with legal obligations.

AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 29; Title 33; Title 39 and Title 47, relative to artificial intelligence.Definition 8 of 10

A court order requiring a party to do or refrain from doing a specific act. It is an equitable remedy, often sought to prevent future harm rather than to compensate for past harm.

AN ACT criminalizing and creating a private right of action for the facilitation, encouragement, offer, solicitation, or recommendation of certain acts or actions through a responsive generative communication to a child.Definition 9 of 10

Equitable relief that may require removal, recall, or cessation of unauthorized uses. SB 1111 preserves fast access to temporary restraining orders and related court orders for harmful synthetic media.

Senate Bill No. 1111Definition 10 of 10

Not to be confused with

Civil Action

Civil action encompasses broader legal proceedings seeking damages and costs beyond just court orders to stop actions.

Declaratory Relief

Declaratory relief clarifies rights without compelling or prohibiting specific actions, unlike injunctive relief's mandatory orders.

Questions and answers

What does injunctive relief prevent under Michigan election law?

It prevents distribution of materially deceptive media, like AI deepfakes, within 90 days of an election without disclaimers. Violation is a misdemeanor.

Who can seek injunctive relief for deepfakes in Nevada?

A candidate depicted in an undisclosed deepfake can seek a court order to stop further publication or dissemination.

How does injunctive relief apply to online platforms in California AB 2655?

Authorized parties can seek court orders against non-compliant large online platforms to enforce blocking or labeling of deceptive AI content during elections.