The AI regulatory landscape in the United States is fragmenting at an unprecedented pace. There is no single federal AI law. Instead, all 50 states are moving independently—introducing bills, enacting laws, and creating a compliance patchwork that is becoming impossible for any one compliance team to track manually.
As of June 2026, we have published 2032 AI-related bills across every US state and territory. 79 laws have been enacted. New York alone has 382 active bills. Illinois has 226. New Jersey has 177. California has 136. And the pace is accelerating: the number of new AI bills introduced in 2025–2026 legislative sessions has more than doubled compared to 2023–2024.
This guide is the definitive reference for AI legislation in America. We cover every state, link to every state tracking page on our site, break down the most important laws by industry, and give you an actionable compliance checklist. Whether you are a general counsel at a Fortune 500 company, a compliance officer at a healthcare system, an in-house lawyer at a startup, or a founder trying to figure out which states to worry about—this is the resource you need.
Table of Contents
Stay ahead of AI regulation changes across all 50 states.
1. The Big Picture: AI Regulation in 2026
The most important thing to understand about AI regulation in 2026 is that every state is active. We track legislation in all 50 states plus the District of Columbia, and every single one has introduced at least one AI-related bill. This was not the case even two years ago. In 2023, only about 25 states had introduced AI-specific legislation. By 2025, the count hit 45. Now, in 2026, the number is 50 out of 50.
Key Trends Shaping 2026 Legislation
Comprehensive AI frameworks are spreading. Colorado led the way with SB 24-205, the first state-level comprehensive AI Act signed into law in May 2024. Now, legislators in at least a dozen states—including New York, Illinois, New Jersey, California, and Virginia—are advancing omnibus AI bills that go beyond single-issue regulation. These bills attempt to create unified frameworks for high-risk AI systems, complete with impact assessments, bias testing requirements, and enforcement mechanisms.
AI transparency and disclosure are the most common provisions. Of the 2032 AI bills we have published, 199 address AI transparency requirements. These range from chatbot disclosure mandates (requiring businesses to tell users when they are interacting with an AI system) to training data transparency rules like California’s AB 2013, which requires developers to disclose what data their AI models were trained on.
Deepfake regulation has exploded. We now track 162 bills specifically addressing AI-generated deepfakes. This is one of the fastest-growing categories of AI legislation, driven by concerns about election interference, non-consensual intimate imagery, and identity fraud. 47 states now have at least one deepfake-specific statute on the books, with only Alaska, Missouri, and Ohio still lacking dedicated deepfake legislation as of 2026.
Employment AI continues to draw the most regulatory attention. AI used in hiring, firing, and employment decisions remains a top concern. New York City’s Local Law 144 (the AEDT bias audit law) has been in effect since July 2023 and serves as a template for new bills in other states. Illinois, Colorado, Maryland, and Washington all have enacted provisions targeting employment AI.
Healthcare AI regulation is accelerating. With 135 bills addressing AI in healthcare, this sector is experiencing the second-fastest growth in AI-specific regulation. Bills cover everything from AI-assisted diagnosis to clinical decision support, mental health chatbots, and patient data protections. California’s SB 1120 and AB 3030, both signed into law, set early standards for healthcare AI transparency.
AI in government and law enforcement faces increasing restrictions. We track 135 bills governing AI use by government agencies, with 84 specifically addressing facial recognition and 76 targeting law enforcement AI, including predictive policing tools. Several cities and states have banned or restricted government use of facial recognition technology outright.
2. States Leading AI Regulation
While all 50 states are active, a handful are driving the national conversation. These are the states with the most bills, the most enacted laws, and the most ambitious regulatory frameworks. If you operate in any of these states, your AI compliance obligations are already significant—and growing.
New York — 382 Bills, 3 Enacted
New York leads the nation with 382 published AI bills—more than any other state by a wide margin. NYC’s Local Law 144, in effect since July 2023, remains the gold standard for AI hiring regulation. It requires employers to conduct annual independent bias audits of automated employment decision tools, publicly disclose results, and give candidates 10 business days’ notice before AI is used in their evaluation.
Beyond hiring, New York legislators have introduced the RAISE Act (Responsible AI Safety and Education Act), which would create one of the most comprehensive AI governance frameworks in the country. Pending bills also target algorithmic pricing, AI in insurance underwriting, deepfakes in elections, and AI-driven tenant screening. The state’s 379 pending bills cover virtually every industry and use case.
Illinois — 226 Bills, 8 Enacted
Illinois has 8 enacted AI laws and 218 pending bills, making it one of the most active states in the country. The Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act (AIVIA), effective since January 2020, was one of the nation’s first AI-specific employment laws. It requires employers to obtain consent before using AI to analyze video interviews and mandates demographic reporting when AI is the sole decision-maker.
Illinois is also home to the Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA), which—while not AI-specific—has become one of the most important privacy laws for companies using AI systems that process biometric data. BIPA’s private right of action and per-violation damages have produced some of the largest privacy settlements in US history. Recent legislative amendments (HB 3773) are further tightening AI hiring requirements.
New Jersey — 177 Bills, 0 Enacted
New Jersey has the third-highest volume of AI legislation with 177 published AI bills. While none have been enacted yet, the pipeline is massive. Key proposals include biometric surveillance restrictions, algorithmic pricing regulations, deepfake criminal penalties, and AI audit mandates for employment and housing decisions. New Jersey is widely expected to enact its first comprehensive AI law in the current session.
California — 136 Bills, 5 Enacted (with Active Rulemaking)
California has 136 published AI bills and an aggressive rulemaking agenda. While no comprehensive AI statute has been enacted, the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) is finalizing regulations on automated decision-making technology (ADMT) under the existing CCPA/CPRA framework. These rules, when finalized, will give California consumers the right to opt out of AI-driven decisions in employment, insurance, housing, and other consequential contexts.
Key enacted laws include AB 2013 (training data transparency), SB 1120 (healthcare AI disclosure), AB 3030 (AI-generated communications in healthcare), and multiple deepfake laws. SB 1047, a high-profile frontier model safety bill, was vetoed by the governor in 2024, but multiple successor bills have been introduced in the 2025–2026 session.
Colorado — 12 Bills, 1 Enacted
Colorado’s SB 24-205 (the Colorado AI Act) is the most comprehensive state-level AI law in America. Signed in May 2024, it takes effect on June 30, 2026 (delayed from the original February 1, 2026 effective date by SB 25B-004, signed August 28, 2025). The law requires developers and deployers of “high-risk AI systems”—those that make or materially influence consequential decisions in employment, education, financial services, healthcare, housing, insurance, and government services—to conduct impact assessments, implement risk management programs, provide consumer notices, and report algorithmic discrimination to the Attorney General.
Small businesses with fewer than 50 full-time equivalent (FTE) employees may qualify for limited exemptions, but only when the business does not train or fine-tune the high-risk AI system on its own data, uses it solely for the developer's intended purpose, and makes the developer's impact assessment available to consumers. The statute does not impose a revenue threshold for the small-business exemption. Penalties can reach $20,000 per violation under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act ($50,000 for violations involving elderly consumers).
Hawaii — 110 Bills, 0 Enacted
Hawaii has emerged as a surprise leader in AI legislation volume with 110 published AI bills. Bills target AI disclosure requirements, protections for minors interacting with AI systems, civil rights review of government AI, and regulation of autonomous systems. While no bills have been enacted yet, the volume signals strong legislative interest that businesses operating in Hawaii should monitor.
Virginia — 59 Bills, 2 Enacted
Virginia’s 59 published AI bills cover a wide range of AI applications. The state’s existing Virginia Consumer Data Protection Act (VCDPA) already provides opt-out rights for profiling that produces legal or similarly significant effects, giving Virginia one of the stronger existing baselines for AI governance. Pending bills would add AI-specific requirements for education, criminal justice, employment, and healthcare.
Don’t get caught off guard by new AI laws.
3. Industry-Specific Breakdown
AI regulation does not affect every industry equally. Certain sectors face significantly more legislative activity, higher compliance burdens, and stricter enforcement. Here is how the landscape breaks down by industry as of June 2026.
Employment and Hiring AI — 245 Bills
Employment AI is the most regulated use case in the United States. We track 245 bills across the Employment industry category, with key enacted laws including NYC Local Law 144 (bias audits for hiring AI), Illinois AIVIA (video interview consent), and Colorado SB 205 (employment AI as a high-risk category). Maryland HB 1202 restricts facial recognition in hiring.
Key requirements across states:
- Independent bias audits (NYC, Colorado, proposed in NJ and WA)
- Pre-use notice and candidate consent (IL, NYC, CO, proposed in CA)
- Disparate impact testing and disclosure (NYC, CO)
- Opt-out alternatives for applicants (NYC, proposed in CA)
- Annual reporting on AI decision outcomes by demographics (IL)
Healthcare AI — 352 Bills
Healthcare is the largest industry category by bill volume, with 352 bills touching AI in healthcare contexts. California has enacted two targeted laws: SB 1120 (requiring disclosure when AI is used in patient-facing communications) and AB 3030 (regulating AI-generated health information). Bills in other states address AI-assisted diagnosis, clinical decision support tools, mental health chatbots, and HIPAA intersection issues.
Key requirements emerging across states:
- Disclosure when AI is used in clinical decisions or patient communications
- Human oversight requirements for AI-driven diagnosis
- Patient consent for AI processing of health data
- Transparency about AI training data used in clinical models
- Liability frameworks for AI-assisted medical errors
Read our healthcare AI compliance guide →
Finance and Insurance AI — 263 + 71 Bills
Financial services and insurance together account for nearly 334 AI-related bills. Insurance-specific legislation (71 bills) is concentrated in states with large insurance markets: Colorado, New York, Connecticut, and California. Colorado’s existing insurance AI law (C.R.S. 10-3-1104.9) predates SB 205 and specifically requires insurers to test AI systems for unfair discrimination. Pending bills in New York and New Jersey would require bias audits for AI used in underwriting, claims processing, and rate-setting.
In financial services (263 bills), legislation targets AI in lending, credit scoring, fraud detection, and algorithmic trading. Consumer protection is the primary driver, with bills focusing on explainability requirements and adverse action notices when AI drives credit or lending decisions.
Read our insurance AI compliance guide →
Education AI — 264 Bills
AI in education is drawing intense legislative scrutiny, with 264 bills across the Education industry category. Bills address AI-driven tutoring platforms, automated grading, student data protections, and age-appropriate AI design. Several states are proposing requirements that schools disclose when AI tools are used in educational assessments or disciplinary decisions. Virginia and Illinois have been particularly active in this space.
Government and Law Enforcement AI — 302 Bills
Government use of AI, particularly in law enforcement, faces some of the strictest proposed restrictions. We track 302 bills in the Law Enforcement industry category. Legislation covers facial recognition bans (several cities and states have enacted outright prohibitions for government use), restrictions on predictive policing algorithms, requirements for judicial authorization before deploying AI surveillance tools, and mandatory algorithmic impact assessments for government procurement of AI systems.
Media and Advertising AI — 141 + 76 Bills
The media industry has 141 published AI bills, while advertising-specific AI legislation accounts for 76 bills. Deepfake regulation is the primary driver in media, while advertising bills focus on AI-generated political ads, disclosure requirements for AI-created content, and restrictions on algorithmically targeted political messaging. These categories are growing fastest heading into the 2026 election cycle.
4. All 50 States: Quick Reference Table
The table below covers every US state and the District of Columbia. Click any state name to see its full tracking page with all bills, statuses, and enforcement timelines.
| State | Bills Published | Enacted | Pending | Key Bill | Activity Level |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Alabama | 16 | 1 | 15 | SB 63 | Medium |
| Alaska | 10 | 0 | 10 | HB217 | Medium |
| Arizona | 19 | 0 | 19 | HB4080 | Medium |
| Arkansas | 8 | 0 | 8 | HB1041 | Medium |
| California | 136 | 5 | 131 | AB 1979 | High |
| Colorado | 15 | 3 | 12 | SB 24-205 | High |
| Connecticut | 23 | 0 | 23 | SB 435 | Medium |
| Delaware | 9 | 0 | 9 | HB306 | Medium |
| District of Columbia | 6 | 0 | 6 | B26-0524 | Low |
| Florida | 41 | 12 | 29 | SB 1344 | Medium |
| Georgia | 26 | 1 | 25 | SB 444 | Medium |
| Hawaii | 110 | 0 | 110 | SB3001 | High |
| Idaho | 6 | 1 | 5 | S 1297 | Low |
| Illinois | 226 | 8 | 218 | SB1920 | High |
| Indiana | 14 | 0 | 14 | HB 1421 | Low |
| Iowa | 34 | 0 | 34 | SF2417 | Medium |
| Kansas | 15 | 2 | 13 | HB 2671 | Medium |
| Kentucky | 35 | 0 | 35 | HB692 | Medium |
| Louisiana | 30 | 0 | 30 | HB 639 | Medium |
| Maine | 9 | 1 | 8 | LD1822 | Low |
| Maryland | 81 | 0 | 81 | SB141 | High |
| Massachusetts | 50 | 0 | 50 | H3669 | Medium |
| Michigan | 15 | 0 | 15 | SB0760 | Medium |
| Minnesota | 37 | 0 | 37 | HF 4979 | Medium |
| Mississippi | 38 | 14 | 24 | SB2294 | Medium |
| Missouri | 17 | 0 | 17 | SB1444 | Medium |
| Montana | 5 | 1 | 4 | SB 413 | Medium |
| Nebraska | 11 | 5 | 6 | LB525 | Low |
| Nevada | 6 | 3 | 3 | — | Medium |
| New Hampshire | 21 | 0 | 21 | SB 657 | Low |
| New Jersey | 177 | 0 | 177 | A 2620 | High |
| New Mexico | 4 | 0 | 4 | HB22 | Low |
| New York | 382 | 3 | 379 | Local Law 144 | High |
| North Carolina | 9 | 0 | 9 | S640 | Low |
| North Dakota | 5 | 0 | 5 | HB1167 | Low |
| Ohio | 18 | 0 | 18 | HB 813 | Medium |
| Oklahoma | 19 | 0 | 19 | HB 3546 | Medium |
| Oregon | 13 | 6 | 7 | SB1516 | Low |
| Pennsylvania | 19 | 0 | 19 | HB2314 | Medium |
| Rhode Island | 33 | 0 | 33 | HB 7538 | Medium |
| South Carolina | 30 | 0 | 30 | H4591 | Medium |
| South Dakota | 2 | 0 | 2 | SB111 | Low |
| Tennessee | 61 | 7 | 54 | HB 1513 | High |
| Texas | 39 | 0 | 39 | HB149 | Medium |
| Utah | 8 | 1 | 7 | HB 276 | Medium |
| Vermont | 22 | 0 | 22 | H0814 | Medium |
| Virginia | 59 | 2 | 57 | HB1124 | High |
| Washington | 20 | 2 | 18 | HB 1170 | Medium |
| West Virginia | 28 | 0 | 28 | HCR 94 | Medium |
| Wisconsin | 11 | 0 | 11 | SB1140 | Medium |
| Wyoming | 4 | 1 | 3 | HB 102 | Low |
Activity level explained: High = 40+ bills or enacted comprehensive law. Medium = 8–39 bills, active legislative activity. Low = fewer than 8 bills, limited current activity.
5. Multi-State AI Compliance Checklist
If your company deploys AI systems that affect people in multiple states—and in 2026, that includes most technology companies—you need a systematic approach to compliance. This checklist is designed for compliance officers, in-house counsel, and startup founders who need to understand their obligations across the patchwork of state AI laws.
Step 1: Map Your AI Systems and Jurisdictions
- Inventory every AI system your company develops, deploys, or procures. Include chatbots, recommendation engines, hiring tools, fraud detection models, pricing algorithms, clinical decision support, and any system that makes or influences decisions about people.
- Identify the states where your AI systems affect people. This is not where your company is headquartered—it is where your customers, employees, applicants, patients, or users are located. If you have employees in New York, your hiring AI must comply with NYC Local Law 144. If you sell insurance in Colorado, your underwriting AI must comply with SB 205.
- Classify each AI system by risk level. Colorado’s SB 205 defines “high-risk AI systems” as those that make or materially influence consequential decisions in employment, education, financial services, healthcare, housing, insurance, and government services. Use this framework even in states without explicit risk classifications.
Step 2: Assess Transparency and Disclosure Requirements
- Check chatbot disclosure mandates. Multiple states require businesses to disclose when a user is interacting with an AI system rather than a human. California, Illinois, and several other states have enacted or proposed such requirements.
- Review pre-use notification requirements. NYC Local Law 144 requires 10 business days’ notice before using AI in employment decisions. Colorado SB 205 requires notice before any adverse AI-driven consequential decision. Check each relevant state for notification timing and content requirements.
- Evaluate training data disclosure obligations. California AB 2013 requires AI developers to disclose training data information. Similar requirements are pending in other states.
Step 3: Implement Bias Testing and Impact Assessments
- Conduct bias audits where required. NYC Local Law 144 mandates annual independent bias audits. Colorado SB 205 requires impact assessments for high-risk AI. Even where not legally required, bias testing is rapidly becoming a best practice that regulators expect.
- Document your testing methodology. Maintain records of how bias testing was conducted, what metrics were evaluated, what disparities were found, and what remediation steps were taken. Colorado requires alignment with NIST AI RMF or ISO/IEC 42001.
- Publish audit results where required. NYC requires public posting of bias audit results for at least six months. Colorado requires AG notification within 90 days if algorithmic discrimination is discovered.
Step 4: Establish Governance and Human Oversight
- Designate an AI compliance owner. Someone in your organization needs to be accountable for AI governance. For large companies, this may be a dedicated AI ethics or compliance team. For smaller companies, this may be the general counsel or CTO.
- Implement human review processes for consequential AI decisions. Multiple states require or propose that consumers have the right to request human review of AI-driven adverse decisions.
- Create an AI system registry. Maintain an internal registry of all AI systems, their purposes, risk classifications, applicable state laws, and compliance status. Update it quarterly.
Step 5: Set Up Monitoring for New Legislation
- Subscribe to legislative tracking. With 1,953+ pending bills that could become law at any time, passive monitoring is not sufficient. Use our daily AI law digest to track new bills, status changes, and enforcement actions across all 50 states.
- Build compliance deadlines into your calendar. Colorado SB 205’s full enforcement begins June 30, 2026. New audit cycles under NYC LL 144 run annually. Track every state-specific deadline that applies to your systems.
- Review your compliance posture quarterly. The regulatory landscape is changing too fast for annual reviews. Re-assess your AI inventory, jurisdiction mapping, and compliance status at least every quarter.
Track every AI law deadline in one place.
6. How to Stay Current
AI regulation is moving faster than any other area of technology law. A bill introduced today can become law within months. An enforcement action announced tomorrow can reshape compliance expectations overnight. Here is how to keep up.
Use Our Free Tracking Tools
AI Laws by State publishes 2032 AI-related bills across all 50 states, updated daily. Every bill has its own detail page with status, full text, AI-generated summary, business impact analysis, and related legislation. Every state has a dedicated tracking page with all current and historical AI bills.
Key features for compliance teams:
- State tracking pages: See every AI bill for any state, filterable by status, topic, industry, and risk level.
- Topic pages: Track legislation by category—AI in hiring, healthcare AI, deepfakes, facial recognition, and more.
- State comparison tool: Compare AI laws side-by-side between any two states.
- Daily digest: Get a daily email with new AI bills, status changes, and enforcement actions for the states you care about.
Subscribe for Updates
Our weekly and daily update emails are the fastest way to stay on top of AI legislation changes. New bills, status changes, and enforcement actions—delivered to your inbox before they hit the news cycle.
Get Expert Help
If your company needs hands-on compliance guidance—help mapping your AI systems to state requirements, conducting bias audits, preparing impact assessments, or building an AI governance program—we can connect you with attorneys and compliance consultants who specialize in AI law.
Need Help With AI Compliance?
Connect with a compliance specialist who understands your state's AI regulations.
Thanks. Your request has been received.
A compliance specialist will review your request and reach out within 1 business day.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified attorney for guidance specific to your situation.
Subscribe to the daily AI law digest →