The Washington Examiner’s Derek Tresner wrote about HLLI’s free speech victory in Accountability in State Government and Dan Bartel v. Austin Knudsen, quoting HLLI attorney Adam Schulman about the case.

When asked if the case establishes a precedent nationally, Schulman said, “I think it certainly does. There are many officials who feel they have the authority and duty to regulate misinformation more broadly.”

Yet for future campaigns, in Montana at least, AI-generated imagery and messaging will be protected under the First Amendment as much as any other doctored image has been protected in the past.

The real question here is not whether AI-generated speech is dangerous, but who gets to decide what speech is and isn’t appropriate. Schulman said many legislators view artificial intelligence as “low-hanging fruit” to go after misinformation, and that those same legislators want to “anoint themselves the arbiters of truth.”

Read more at the Washington Examiner.