Colorado · 2025 Regular Session · Bill
SB 25-288: Intimate Digital Depictions Criminal & Civil Actions
Enacted Official data
- Introduced
- In committee
- Passed one chamber
- Passed both chambers
- Enacted
Last official action: ·Record last updated:
Plain-language summary
SB 25-288 is a bill introduced in the Colorado Senate on April 9, 2025. According to its official title, it concerns: Intimate Digital Depictions Criminal & Civil Actions. Primary sponsor: Matt Soper (Republican), Brianna Titone (Democratic), Robert Rodriguez (Democratic). It lists 20 additional sponsors. Most recent recorded action (June 2, 2025): Governor Signed.
Generated automatically from the official title, sponsor list, and status record only. It does not characterize the bill’s purpose or effects. How summaries are written
Official summary
Abstract published by the legislature (via Open States). Text as published by the legislature; reproduced verbatim.
The act creates a cause of action against a person who discloses or threatens to disclose a highly realistic but false visual depiction of another individual (depicted individual) that has been created, altered, or produced by generative AI, image editing software, or computer-generated means and that depicts the intimate body parts of the depicted individual or certain sexual acts involving the depicted individual (intimate digital depiction). A depicted individual who has suffered harm from the nonconsensual disclosure or threatened disclosure of an intimate digital depiction has a cause of action against the person who disclosed or threatened to disclose the intimate digital depiction if the person knew or acted with reckless disregard for whether the depicted individual: Did not consent to the disclosure; Would experience severe emotional distress due to the disclosure or threatened disclosure; and Was identifiable. The act creates an exception to its civil liability provisions for a provider of the technology used to create an intimate digital depiction. Other exceptions include disclosures related to matters of public concern, parody, satire, and impersonation; disclosures made in good faith in various circumstances; and broadcasts of third-party content under certain conditions. A successful plaintiff may recover the defendant's monetary gain from the intimate digital depiction; either actual damages or liquidated damages of $150,000; exemplary damages; and litigation costs, including reasonable attorney fees. A court may also order the defendant to cease disclosure of the intimate digital depiction. In the context of the criminal law punishing sexual exploitation of a child, the act updates the definition of "sexually exploitative material" to include realistic computer-generated digital depictions that depict an identifiable child. The act changes the criminal offenses of posting a private image for harassment and posting a private image for pecuniary gain to the related offenses of disclosing a private intimate image or intimate digital depiction for the same purposes. A person who is eighteen years of age or older commits disclosure of a private intimate image or intimate digital depiction for harassment or for pecuniary gain if the person discloses or threatens to disclose a private intimate image or intimate digital depiction without consent. The harassment offense now requires that the disclosure or threatened disclosure cause physical, emotional, or reputational harm to the depicted individual. Like the offenses for posting a private image in current law, disclosing a private intimate image or intimate digital depiction is a class 1 misdemeanor; except that the act increases the penalty to a class 6 felony if the person made the disclosure and the disclosure posed an imminent and serious threat to the safety of the depicted individual or the depicted individual's immediate family and the person knew or reasonably should have known of the imminent and serious threat. The act changes the offenses of posting, possessing, or exchanging a private image by a juvenile to the related offenses of disclosing, possessing, or exchanging a private intimate image or intimate digital depiction by a juvenile. The penalties remain the same. (Note: This summary applies to this bill as enacted.)
Sponsors
Sponsors by party (alphabetical): Democratic 20 · Republican 1
| Name | Role | Party | Chamber | District |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Matt Soper | Primary sponsor | Republican | House | 54 |
| Brianna Titone | Primary sponsor | Democratic | House | 27 |
| Robert Rodriguez | Primary sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 32 |
| S. Bird | Co-sponsor | Not applicable (committee) | — | — |
| Andy Boesenecker | Co-sponsor | Democratic | House | 53 |
| Jeff Bridges | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 26 |
| James Coleman | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 33 |
| Lisa Cutter | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 20 |
| Monica Duran | Co-sponsor | Democratic | House | 23 |
| Cecelia Espenoza | Co-sponsor | Democratic | House | 4 |
| Tony Exum | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 11 |
| Eliza Hamrick | Co-sponsor | Democratic | House | 61 |
| Nick Hinrichsen | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 3 |
| D. Michaelson Jenet | Co-sponsor | Not applicable (committee) | — | — |
| Iman Jodeh | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 29 |
| Cathy Kipp | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 14 |
| William Lindstedt | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 25 |
| Karen McCormick | Co-sponsor | Democratic | House | 11 |
| Kyle Mullica | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 24 |
| Naquetta Ricks | Co-sponsor | Democratic | House | 40 |
| Dylan Roberts | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 8 |
| Marc Snyder | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 12 |
| Katie Wallace | Co-sponsor | Democratic | Senate | 17 |
“Support” is shown only as formal sponsorship recorded by the legislature. Roll-call votes are available on the official bill page.
Recent official actions
- Governor Signed
- Sent to the Governor
- Signed by the President of the Senate
- Signed by the Speaker of the House
- House Third Reading Passed - No Amendments
- Senate Considered House Amendments - Result was to Concur - Repass
- House Second Reading Special Order - Passed with Amendments - Committee, Floor
- House Committee on Judiciary Refer Amended to House Committee of the Whole
- House Second Reading Special Order - Laid Over Daily - No Amendments
- Senate Third Reading Passed - No Amendments
- Introduced In House - Assigned to Judiciary
- Senate Second Reading Passed with Amendments - Committee, Floor
Showing 12 most recent of 16 actions. Full history