A federal judge in Billings is working through a case that includes the use of AI images in political material.A law passed by the Montana Legislature in 2025 prohibits the use of AI-generated content meant to deceive a voter, b ut only when distributed within 60 days before an election.Watch AI-generated poltical content here: A Montana law restricting AI-generated political content heard in federal court in BillingsBoth sides argued in U.S. District Court in Billings on Friday.Former state Sen. Dan Bartel sent out campaign material showing three candidates holding pride flags and wearing preferred pronoun buttons.His attorneys say those images were not deepfake and that he did not break the law."They started with a real image of the candidates and then they put on, basically, gay, LGBTQ plus," said state Sen. Janet Ellis, D-Helena.Ellis was the main sponsor of Senate Bill 25, which states election communication that uses AI-generated deepfake content must include a disclosure."It doesn't prohibit that from going up. It just requires disclosure," Ellis said.Bartel, from Lewistown, put out campaign mailers targeting three different candidates.Those candidates filed complaints with the Montana Commissioner of Political Practices against Bartel.Bartel's attorneys say the flyers were not fakes, and he did not break the law under Senate Bill 25.Adam Schulman represents Bartel and his group, Accountability In State Government.Schulman says Senate Bill 25 goes too far and violates free speech and due process rights."The problem is when a state comes in and views that its mission to arbitrate the truth and for the sake of free and fair elections, we need to limit the amount of speech," Schulman said.Schulman says candidates have an opportunity to rebut any political material."Throughout history, free and fair elections are a rough-and-tumble process of everybody speaking their mind, and it's not always going to be in an agreeable and pleasant way," Schulman said.Commissioner of Political Practices Chris Gallus says he plans to dismiss the complaints against Bartel, saying the specific mailers discussed in court were political satire, not deepfakes."They didn't have the deepfake disclaimer on them," Gallus said. "And based on the satirical nature of the speech involved, it wasn't required. And that's what I concluded."Meanwhile, Bartel has plans to keep sending out AI-generated mailers, even as the judge has not made a final ruling."That declaration only spoke to these three complaints that had previously been filed, it didn't speak to anything that could happen in the future," Schulman said about Gallus's filing on Thursday."Whether or not that it's unconstitutional, we're still in kind of probably wide disagreement," Schulman said.U.S. District Judge Susan Waters plans to issue a ruling by early September.This story was reported on-air by a journalist and has been converted to this platform with the assistance of AI. Our editorial team verifies all reporting on all platforms for fairness and accuracy. ...read more read less