The Take It Down Act isn’t a law, it’s a weapon

It is the season of the Internet safety law again. After a narrow failure to pass the online safety law for children in 2024, Congress is now advancing Take this verbThat criminalizes unusual intimate images (NCII, which was called “Revenge Porn”, including the content created by artificial intelligence) and defines the requirements of web platforms to remove it. The bill received support from the first lady Melania Trump and President Donald Trump Describe During his joint speech to Congress on the fourth of March, he promised to sign him. In a natural world, this can be a positive step towards solving the real problem of NCII, a problem that makes Amnesty International worse.

But we are not in an ordinary world. Parts of the Take It download law will likely become a sword for a corrupt presidential administration from the shield to protect NCII victims – supporters of both civil freedoms and major technical accountability should be aware.

The typical discourse on a draft law such as The Take Download this way: legislators suggest a rule that is supposed to do something good and popular, such as helping non -sectarian sexual victims to get rid of those images. Civil freedom advocates go, “Wait a minute, and this has a lot of bad side effects!” Then everyone argues. Is it acceptable to risk removing the legally protected speech if it removes a lot of bad things besides that? Does protecting the right to private encrypted messages deserve the harm of people who secretly convey harmful content? Does the bill make one set of results more likely than the other, and is there a better language that will set standards?

These arguments miss the largest current context. Regardless of the formulation of the Take It Download Law, it will not be registered by the president who intends to follow it in good faith. It will be selectively implemented by the administration of continuing laws such as bargaining or ammunition, using political enemies while exempting anyone who earns Saleh Trump. Currently, this includes many of the largest social media companies on the Internet, and with expansion, some of the largest possible NCII channels.

Simplyly express: even if Take its accept the name of making technology companies protect users, in The era of organizing gang technologyand Maybe you don’t get trade.

The problem here is a problem, yes, I understand that we are all tired of thinking: The constitutional crisis. The Republican -led Congress willingly It was placed as a dangerous branch of the government in 2025. legislators failed to act when President Donald Trump and shadow president Elon Musk began evoking Congress, while circumventing the legal process and snoring agencies established by the legislature and funding it.

This is bad for direct reasons Like EbolaOf course, but this also means something more essential. Congress can no longer claim that what it goes through is the laws. What makes it now weapons – Trump rules and other parties he uses only against people who do not like them.

If this looks crazy, let’s take a look at some legal processes that have offended and managed by Trump over the past few weeks:

Expand the Trump of Trump Associats and I can continue. Elon Musk Using a pet judge And a twisted version of the almost distortion law to inhibit non -profit organizations to report the white excellence of X. Capital lawyer A threat to trial Wireless Report staff of the government efficiency department (DOGE). The agency designed to impose laws on online fraud Disclosure of lawsuits Against the alleged predators Perhaps it is closed.

It is clearly clear that the Trump administration and its supporters do not have great interest in applying Congress laws constantly, and given that it is not clearly clear what any deputy who behaves in good faith will happen if they pass new laws.

Let’s take a look at an act, take it through this lens. In addition to criminalizing the publication or disclosure of “non -general intimate material photography” of a person to be recognized, laws carry out the tasks of the Federal Trade Committee (FTC) while ensuring the creation of web platforms for a process of removing this imaging within 48 hours, at the risk of violating the law of commercial practices other than disturbance.

This part has proven particularly controversial, and usually asks complicated questions. The Electronic Border Foundation also explains“Although this ruling is designed to allow NCII victims to remove this harmful content, its extensive definitions and lack of guarantees are likely to cause people’s abuse of the notice and spread system to remove legal speech.” How much side damage, we may usually ask, should we accept the protection of people from abuse?

But if any company can avoid following the law, the answer to the side damage is not related – they have no legal cause to do the “protection of persons from abuse”.

Here is an intellectual experience: Elon Musk has the social media platform X. In 2024, it was used Publishing pictures created from artificial intelligence From Taylor Swift. The company has cut large parts of the Moderation team under Musk, leaving a few resources to build and employees of the removal system required by the Take It Download. But Musk also heads the powerful government. Doug seems to have almost unlimited power to reduce other agencies financing, and it may be for them The ends have already started In FTC.

If you ignore the verb Take It Download, in which world of FTC enter to stop it?

The same question applies to at least two social media giants: Meta and Tiktok. Meta Mark Zuckerberg CEO of Meta Mark Zuckerberg has temporarily obtained Trump’s approval by doing things like Checking the facts and Throwing women and converting people Under the Bus for Moderation Facebook. The United States government It is supposed to go to king Half takkok. If these companies end up improving their removal systems, it will be because they face general pressure or up to the opportunity to blackmail Trump, and not somewhat legal consequences. Perhaps you think, Trump’s strong personal objections to the abuse of women – the vast majority of NCII victims – may mean that he will not tolerate her even among his allies. but Let us He is TRUEand You probably no.

In light of the cultural wars that Trump has extensively fought, smaller platforms with an unambiguously terrible content may escape. All they have to do is put themselves as victims of “canceling culture” or “sadness”, and the administration may appear in the other direction. Once you press the government of another country to issue what the Republican Public Prosecutor calls two “Acknowledged” the sexes of sexIt is clear that there is not much that you cannot excuse.

Meanwhile, small services that have no such guarantees can work under a cloud of uncertainty about the risks indicated by groups such as EF.

Is Take it download act a bolle gower? It doesn’t matter. Its sponsors can have Ted Cruise (R-TX) and Amy Clubuwshar (D-Mn) the most essential legislative text (if it is not clear, and they will not change the fact that this Before Congress before it passes suggestions, not laws. (Cruz and Klopothar’s offices did not respond to the publication time for questions about how FTC imposed the law against X.)

Perhaps some parts of the Take Its Law will be possible in useful ways, even if they continue to ask the first amendment questions. Defenders were pressuring the federal laws that deal with NCII providers for years, and law enforcement can use these laws to suppress some people who make this content and deliberately spread them. Political support, who wanders in political support, may still be skiing, but you will face an opportunity to win other issues. This is all lands of barter.

Looking at the above issues, there is no reason to believe that the Take It download law will make most of the large social companies take NCII more seriously. Instead, the provisions of the law platform can be worse than useless. In general, the use of government removal systems that the government is easily imposed by private private actors. (This happens primarily with “Copystrike” blackmail The oversight, which has grown from mandatory removal systems for violating copyright.)

More specifically, the conservatives pointed to an interest in reducing the supposed “liberal” platforms – Wikipedia in particular Often an attack by Musk and targeted by the Heritage Foundation. The Take Download Law covers online platforms (except for email and some other points) that “primarily [provide] A forum for the content created by users, “While Wikipedia is not usually in the field of unusual naked spread, it appears to be reasonably covered with some interpretations of the law. It is possible that FTC may have no group about launching a punitive investigation if the construction in the random mail with Deepfakes begins.

The critics of the Take It Download also argue that it can Add responsibility for encryption from one side to the end. These provisions can stimulate companies like Apple – which is still one of the players less than Trump Tech – to remove data protection features, especially medium Anti -transparent pressure outside. It will be a problem under any presidency, but in one Shortly contempt for the privacy of dataThe danger is more urgent.

And again, even if you think the encryption is removed goodThere is an equal opportunity that Trump only uses a threat of responsibility as a financial lever-if Tim Cook invests enough money in American factories, IMESSAGE security remains continuous.

In a state of total presidential control, all these risks may be a point of discussion, because the administration will not need any excuse at all to target its enemies. But we still have a court system that puts some tests (limited and limited), and the judge can easily submit a complete nonsense. Creating a new excuse may mean longer and more expensive battles while courts explain the statute. Take It Download looks like the online safety law closest to success, but for the near future, any bill regulating internet content poses similar risks.

Civil liberals often warn people against seeing regulations through a perspective of the worst person you can imagine their interpretation, and sometimes I think this is based on that it is very satirized – if you assume that every law will draw attention in strange ways, then at a certain stage no The law is logical. But this entire argument belongs to a world in which Congress is interested in the executive authority that obeys his directives to the message and does not give the president continuous indicators that he will do its weapon.

For anyone who wants technology platforms a stronger position than unusual intimate images, many state lawyers are still seriously investing in the governance process. ((Almost all countries You have a form of NCII’s ban, although these usually do not deal with the larger platform issues.) Soft power – protests, provinces and exhibitions – companies – can push for disposal, and in fact, many technology companies have introduced new NCII bases over the years. And if Congress decides that he is interested in becoming a real branch of the government again, we can restart those endless conversations on safety for privacy and speech. Until then, the constitution is the only thing that legislators seem to be able to download.