Memes and Whatsapp stickers are a subsection of Mexico’s rich culture, a tangible, quotidian, popular form of art. I won’t even try to capture their essence here, but will instead present the detail for a proposed reform to penalize the use of stickers, memes, images, and videos that have been digitally altered for the express purpose of harming the reputation of another individual.
What is the anti-sticker law?
A Morena-affiliated member of the Chamber of Deputies, Armando Corona Arvizu, presented a proposal to amend Mexico’s federal penal code to punish anyone who creates, manipulates, or disseminates digitally altered images and videos (including Whatsapp stickers and memes) intended to humiliate and/or harm the reputation of another individual. Corona Arvizu originally presented the proposal, nicknamed the anti-sticker and anti-meme law, on September 23rd,2025. The law is still in the early stages of discussion and has not yet passed.
It is, however, a timely topic of conversation in Mexico, raising questions about how the government can effectively strike a balance between protecting against digital violence and harassment while simultaneously protecting civil liberties – a key concern in Mexico, particularly given recent cases where journalists and private citizens have faced legal sanctions for speaking out against politicians. More on that below.
What is the purpose of the anti-sticker law?
The “anti-sticker” law proposes a reform to Mexico’s federal criminal code (by introducing Articles 211 Bis 8 and 211 Bis 9) to punish individuals who make and/or share digital media that has been created with or altered by artificial intelligence (including deepfakes) that is intended to humiliate or harm the reputation of another individual.
The reform proposes up to six years of prison and fines of up to $7,800 USD (the equivalent of 600 days’ worth of the daily minimum wage in Mexico) for anyone found guilty of violating the law. The penalties increase if the victim is: a minor, a person with a disability, or, notably, a public servant. In his comments about the proposed legislation, Armando Corona Arvizu made clear that any individual who utilizes the “image, voice, or identity” of another person without their consent and for harassment will face legal consequences under this new law.
Why was the anti-sticker law proposed?
Supporters argue that the proposed legislation is dual-purpose. It addresses cyberbullying while also establishing a mechanism to prosecute extortionary schemes that rely on AI and deepfakes to trick their victims. For context, in 2024, nearly 21% of Mexicans who use the internet were victims of some form of digital violence, according to INEGI. Extortion was the third most common crime in Mexico, with a rate of nearly 6,000 extortion-related crimes per 100,000 people in 2024, according to INEGI.
Extortion is a major source of income for organized crime groups and cartels in Mexico, with virtual kidnappings and call center schemes permitting these groups to rake in significant amounts of money at the expense of their victims. Technological developments that have democratized access to AI are the same ones that will fuel this next level of extortion, almost certain to further exacerbate the issue. While laws such as the federal law on data protection, the copyright law, and Ley Olimpia offer some protections, Corona Arvizu and other supporters of the reform argue that current legislation fails to provide sufficient protection against digital manipulation without consent – a concern that is growing in proportion to the rapid advances of AI technology.
Why is the anti-sticker law controversial?
However, critics argue that the legislation is an effort to quiet dissent, particularly to quell discontent aimed at public figures and expressed through creative mechanisms, like memes, reels, and WhatsApp stickers. This is not the first time government officials have sought to limit criticisms of elected officials. Journalists have been forced to rescind pieces and offer apologies, including:
Héctor de Mauleón, who was forced to retract a column he wrote about huachicoleo and the judiciary in the state of Tamaulipas.
Ángel Camarillo, who received sanctions and fines in the state of Veracruz after writing about political nepotism in the state.
Jorge Luis González has faced a gag order1 from a local court in the state of Campeche after writing criticizing coverage of the current governor, Layda Elena Sansores.
These cases undermine not only journalistic integrity, freedom of speech, and democracy in Mexico, but they also fundamentally threaten the lives of journalists operating in the country. A 2024 report from Reporters without Borders found Mexico to be one of the most dangerous countries in the world for journalists, ranking first for the number of disappeared journalists (30 reported cases in 2024) and third in the world for the number of journalists murdered (5 murders in Mexico in 2024 out of 54 murders worldwide). Despite commitments from the Sheinbaum administration to enhance protections for journalists in Mexico, nine have been killed during the first seven months of 2025, according to Reporters without Borders.
Who is Dato Protegido?
Another case that has made rounds in the Mexican media is that of Diana Karina Barreras, known as “dato protegido.” Barreras currently serves as a federal deputy representing Hermosillo, Sonora. Karla Estrella, a private citizen from Hermosillo, wrote a tweet vaguely accusing the president of the Chamber of Deputies (and member of Morena), Sergio Gutiérrez Luna, and his party of nepotism in 2024. The motive? Gutiérrez’s wife, Diana Karina Barreras, was campaigning for a seat in the Chamber of Deputies. Estrella never mentioned Barreras by name, but the tweet very clearly implied her electoral campaign.
Despite the lack of direct mention, Barreras issued a complaint against Estrella, citing that the tweet negatively impacted her campaign, “subordinating her to a male figure, [and] minimizing [Barrera’s] capabilities and career trajectory.” Mexico’s electoral tribunal found Estrella guilty of gender-based political violence, sanctioning her to complete obligatory coursework and issue a public apology to Barreras. Estrella issued a public aplogy to Barreras on X, which was addressed to “dato protegido” (or “protected information,” in English), rather than addressing Barreras by name. As such, Barreras is now referred to as “dato protegido.” She (along with her hubsand) has faced consequences of her escalation with significant public scrutiny over her flaunting of wealth, with internet sleuths tracking and commenting on the value of her clothing, jewelry, and travels, noting that their expense far exceeds the salary of an elected official.2
In another recent, high profile case, the current president of the Senate, Gerardo Fernández Noroña, issued a complaint against Carlos Velázquez de León, an attorney, after the latter allegedly insulted the Senator in the Mexico City airport. Velázquez de León, a private citizen, was forced to issue a public apology from the Senate, which was livestreamed from the Mexican Senate’s social media accounts.
Why is the anti-sticker law significant?
The “anti-sticker” law is not the first of its kind. Corona presented a similar reform in 2024, but it did not gain traction. In June 2025, the government of the state of Puebla passed “Ley Censura” an effort to sanction cyber harassment – specifically insults, hostilities, and other forms of digital intimidation. While the Chamber of Deputies has not yet debated the “anti-sticker” law, the Morena coordinator of the Chamber of Deputies, Ricardo Monreal, issued a statement today stating his opposition to the law, stating that “nothing should be done that affects freedom of expression….and we must continue creating norms for more rights and freedoms.”
It’s not about the stickers, it’s not about the memes. It’s about the ability to freely express discontent in a country where the ruling party controls all three branches of government, democratic checks and balances seem to be being strategically weakened, and laws are being approved and implemented under the guise of protection.
What Are Mexico’s New Security and Intelligence Laws? Everything You Need to Know
Mexico’s Congress Approves Sweeping Public Security Reforms
What Is Mexico’s New Telecommunications and Broadcasting Law? Everything You Need to Know
A New Telecommunications Law with Far-Reaching Consequences
There are real concerns about security and protecting against extortion, but the Mexican government must strike a balance between legislating to protect against these actions and protecting freedom of expression.
Want tailored insights on the Sheinbaum administration and its impact on business, policy, or bilateral relations? Contact me at momentsinmexico@gmail.com for a complimentary 30-minute consultation.
Any material he must “avoid making statements, expressing opinions, writing, or publishing images mentioning her.” Gonzalez is a retired journalist and the current editor of the publication Tribuna, which has opted to halt publication given the current circumstances.
The Republic of Mexico is a Monarchy.
There is no freedom of Speech.