California Election Law Faces Test as AI Videos Flood LA Mayor's Race
AI-generated videos depicting Spencer Pratt as Batman and Mayor Karen Bass as a villain have exploded across social media during Los Angeles's mayoral campaign, forcing a legal reckoning over how California's emerging AI regulations apply to political content created and shared online.
The videos, many created by filmmaker Charlie Curran and reposted by Pratt, use familiar pop-culture narratives-Batman versus Joker, Luke Skywalker versus Emperor Palpatine-to frame the race as a battle between hero and villain. One video shows Pratt as Batman confronting a Joker-inspired Bass while the city burns. Another depicts Pratt as Luke Skywalker saving Los Angeles while an AI-generated Newsom, as Emperor Palpatine, tells Bass to "finish burning the city to the ground."
The campaign has triggered legal questions about disclosure requirements and the boundaries between satire and misinformation under California law.
What California Law Requires
California has passed two laws aimed at regulating AI-generated political content. Assembly Bill 2355, signed in 2024, requires campaigns that create or distribute AI-generated political advertisements to clearly label them as such. Assembly Bill 972 prohibits distributing "materially deceptive audio or visual media" within 60 days of an election unless it includes a disclosure that the content was manipulated-with exceptions for satire or parody.
Former Assemblymember Wendy Carrillo, who authored AB 2355, identified a significant gap: the law may not apply to content created by third parties and then reshared by a candidate or campaign. "If the general public can easily create content for campaigns, they can also be informed of the legal implications," Carrillo said, arguing the law should require disclaimers regardless of who creates the content.
The Pratt campaign has not directly addressed whether the videos were coordinated with outside creators. Pratt told CNN he reposts large volumes of supporter-generated content without necessarily reviewing every clip in detail.
The Satire Defense
Cal State Long Beach political scientist Matt Lesenyie examined one video showing an AI-generated Bass walking past homeless encampments while the city burned, calling it "over the top" and "shot like a satire." The question of whether such content qualifies for the satire exemption remains unresolved.
Lesenyie said the law has not yet caught up with the technology. "We're in a moment where we're feeling like, 'Hey, is that OK?'" he said. "People push beyond the envelope and new technology has come out. But the law's not there yet."
Whether lawmakers will clarify the rules depends partly on whether they see AI tools as useful for their own future campaigns. Lesenyie noted that legislators may be reluctant to regulate a space they might want to use themselves.
First Amendment Constraints
Sacramento lobbyist Chris Micheli said regulations on individual speech face strict scrutiny under the First Amendment. "When it comes to free speech and political campaigns, laws and regulations are viewed very strictly as to whether or not they might infringe upon somebody's First Amendment rights to advocate in the political arena," he said.
This distinction matters: regulators can more easily impose requirements on a candidate's official campaign than on independent supporters or creators posting online.
How the Videos Function
USC Annenberg professor Karen North said the videos work because they translate complex political frustrations into emotionally simple narratives built around familiar hero-versus-villain archetypes. "You can take his words, his demeanor and his issues and turn them into a superhero versus his opponents who would then be the villains," she said. "It's very easy-what they would call in terms of social media-'snackable content'."
North distinguished these videos from deepfakes designed to deceive. Viewers generally recognize the content as stylized satire rather than literal depictions of reality. Still, she said the videos can strongly shape how voters emotionally process candidates because storytelling is easier to absorb than policy debates.
Political analyst Dan Schnur said the videos have helped Pratt elevate his profile in a deep blue city where registered Republicans face steep odds. "He's attracting more attention and has emerged as a potentially viable contender," Schnur said.
Political Backlash
Bass's campaign called the videos "AI slop," while Raman's campaign criticized Pratt for promoting technology that is displacing Hollywood workers. Women's March Action announced plans to condemn what it described as "racist, misogynistic and violent political tactics" targeting Bass, the city's first woman and first woman of color elected mayor.
Bass herself said the videos take "a violent turn" and worry her because demonizing people can provoke unstable individuals and jeopardize safety. Pratt dismissed these concerns, calling them "the funniest thing I've ever heard."
The LA mayor's race illustrates how generative video technology is making political storytelling faster and cheaper to produce, while AI for Legal professionals and policymakers scramble to clarify which rules apply to content that blurs satire, advocacy and misinformation.
Your membership also unlocks:
