Lawmakers lay over broad AI biometrics bill after committee feedback

DENVER — Lawmakers in the House State, Civic, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee laid over House Bill 10 49 for further amendment after a lengthy hearing that included tech experts, victims and policy advocates.

Representative Bottoms, the bill sponsor, said the bill is intended to protect individuals' biometric and personal identifiers — "you own what you look like, you own your voice, you own your fingerprints" — and to create civil and criminal pathways to hold bad actors accountable when AI is used to create deceptive deepfakes or to impersonate people for fraud or harm.

Committee members expressed broad support for addressing AI‑enabled impersonation but pressed the sponsor on several drafting issues: the scope of the conduct that would trigger a felony, whether the bill is overbroad (for example, potentially capturing satire or benign uses), how "permission" would be defined, overlap with existing statutes addressing deepfakes for candidates and identity‑theft, and the lack of clear mens rea or a narrowly tailored harm standard.

Representative Bottoms said the bill intentionally broadened protections beyond prior narrow deepfake statutes to cover nonpolitical harms and commercial uses of biometric likenesses (he cited commercial contracts such as celebrity persona deals). He said the bill contains First Amendment carve‑outs for news, commentary, parody and satire and that he is open to amendments to narrow scope, add intent elements and refine criminal civil thresholds.

A wide range of witnesses — including software engineers, advocates and private citizens — spoke in support, recounting concerns about reputational damage, fraud and harms to children from unauthorized biometric uses. Technology witnesses urged narrowly tailored language but supported the underlying goal of updated protections. Several members, including Vice Chair Clifford and Representative Luck, urged the sponsor to accept technical amendments and to consider downgrading some penalties or adding a foreseeable‑harm test to reduce frivolous suits and preserve constitutional protections.

Following the public testimony and committee discussion, Representative Luck requested and the chair granted time for the sponsor to draft changes. Representative Bottoms agreed to bring amendments the following week; the committee laid the bill over for action at a later date.

Actions at a glance: HB 10 49 laid over for amendment and future action; sponsor committed to file clarifying amendments.

The sponsor and committee members signaled willingness to continue stakeholder conversations to narrow the statutory language while preserving remedies for victims of AI‑enabled impersonation and biometric misuse.