The rise of deepfake technology poses a novel and uniquely insidious manner of perpetrating domestic violence. Nonconsensual intimate imagery (NCII) abuse and “sextortion” are nothing new. But the increasing accessibility of deepfake technology makes it easier for abusers to carry out these forms of violence, sometimes simply with access to publicly available images of a person. As the technology rapidly evolves, the law has struggled to keep up.

This Note explores how existing law inadequately addresses emerging deepfake technology as it relates to domestic violence. Noting the origins of deepfakes in NCII, it begins with an exploration of the connection between deepfake technology and domestic violence, followed by a survey of the current legal landscape. Although Congress recently enacted the TAKE IT DOWN Act to address the rise in deepfake NCII, patchwork state laws and broad immunity for content platforms often leave victims without sufficient redress.

Finally, this Note strives toward a more comprehensive federal solution. There are three big players in the lifecycle of deepfake NCII abuse: the developer who creates the deepfake program, the abuser who uses that technology to create NCII, and the content platforms hosting the deepfake NCII and allowing it to proliferate across the internet. This Note proposes redistributing responsibility across developers, abusers, and content platforms: pursuing developer liability through products liability litigation, holding abusers accountable by introducing a private right of action for victims who may not want to involve the criminal justice system, and disincentivizing content platforms from hosting deepfake NCII by reforming federal law that currently provides broad immunity for these platforms.

Administrative voluntary departure allows noncitizens facing removal to leave the United States by waiving their right to a hearing before an immigration judge. Although this process provides noncitizens with a quicker alternative to a lengthy removal hearing, the process is not always as “voluntary” as its name suggests. Over the past four decades, noncitizens have alleged that immigration officers threatened and intimidated them in order to obtain waivers of consent, including threats against family members, prolonged detention, and physical abuse. Although the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution states that all persons physically present in the U.S. must receive due process protections regardless of legal status, immigration officers often ignore these protections during the voluntary departure process.

This Note discusses how voluntary departure coercion is not only a product of individual agent misconduct, but also a result of the broad, unrestrained power granted to government officials. The Note outlines the obstacles making coercion difficult to redress, which include evidentiary challenges, limitations on judicial review, and restrictions to bringing legal actions against government officials. To tackle these concerns, the Note imports principles from criminal procedure and constitutional waiver doctrine to develop procedural reforms that may ensure the voluntariness of departure.