Nithya Raman files complaints over AI voice clone in LA mayor race

The campaign of Nithya Raman, the Indian-American city councillor running for mayor of Los Angeles, has filed complaints accusing a political action committee backing Mayor Karen Bass of using an artificial intelligence voice that speaks as Raman. The complaints, reported on October 26, 2026, were lodged with the Los Angeles City Ethics Commission and the California Fair Political Practices Commission against Thrive LA, a super PAC supporting Bass. According to the complaint, signs placed by the group invite voters to call a number advertised as "Nithya Raman Realty", where an AI-generated voice talks in the first person as if it were Raman. Thrive LA has called its advertising satire and says its spending has been disclosed. The election is on November 3.

This is one of the clearest tests yet of how laws on AI in elections hold up during a live, high-profile race. Cheap voice-cloning tools can now produce speech that sounds like a real person in seconds. A phone line that answers in a candidate's voice is a new tactic: unlike a video posted online, it is interactive and can say different things to different callers, which makes it harder to monitor and fact-check.

California is among the US states that have passed rules on deceptive AI election content, including limits on fabricated audio or video of candidates close to an election and requirements to disclose AI use. The Raman campaign argues the phone line breaks those rules, while Thrive LA's defence rests on satire, a form of political speech that has strong protection in the United States. How the regulators treat that tension, and how quickly they act with the vote days away, will be watched by campaigns across the country.

The written disclaimers on the signs are a key detail. Thrive LA can point to them as proof that it has not hidden its role. The Raman campaign argues that the disclaimers do not solve the problem of a phone voice that presents itself as the candidate and, according to the complaint, would not say who paid for it.

For Indian readers, the case has two angles. Raman is a prominent Indian-American figure in Los Angeles politics, and her race has drawn attention in the diaspora. And India, which has seen AI-generated audio and video of politicians in its own election campaigns, is working through similar questions about labelling synthetic media and holding its creators to account.

Short-term: The complaints add pressure in the final week of the Los Angeles mayoral race. Regulators may not rule before November 3, which means voters will decide while the questions remain open.

Long-term: Any ruling will help define where satire ends and illegal impersonation begins under California's AI election laws, and could guide how other states and countries write and enforce similar rules.

Who is affected: Los Angeles voters, the Raman and Bass campaigns, independent political committees that use AI tools in advertising, election regulators, and the Indian-American community following Raman's bid.

Questions and Answers