Skip to content

Session Expired

Your session has expired. Please sign in again to continue where you left off.

Sign In Again

HI HB2500: Relating To Artificial Intelligence.

Dead/Failed Hawaii · 2026 session

Last verified Oct 10, 2026 · official bill text

HB2500 · where it stands

This bill did not become law (dead/failed) · last action Feb 6, 2026.

What do these statuses mean?
Introduced
Filed in the legislature; may be waiting for a committee hearing.
Passed a chamber
Approved by one or both chambers; awaiting further action.
Enacted
Signed into law, or became law without a signature or over a veto.
Effective date
The date the law says it takes effect. Once it has passed, the page shows "Effective" and the date. A court order can still block a law; if we know of one, the summary says so.
Dead / vetoed
Vetoed, failed, or the session ended without action.

In one paragraph

Hawaii's HB 2500 (2026) would have added a chapter on algorithmic decision systems. Developers would have to give deployers risk disclosures; deployers would have to give notice before use and post-decision information (including the 20 most influential characteristics) when a system affects education, employment, finance, government services, health care, housing, insurance or legal services; generative AI would have to be disclosed to users. Developers and deployers would be jointly and severally liable for violations facilitated by the deployer. House committee ECD deferred it February 6, 2026; it died.

Plain-English summary, written with AI assistance. The official text controls.

What it means for business

None: the bill did not pass. It would have put disclosure and liability duties on AI developers and on businesses using AI for significant decisions.

Key provisions

  1. Developers would have to give each deployer a risk analysis, mitigation steps and intended and foreseeable uses and misuses, with duties starting January 1, 2027
  2. Deployers using a system for decisions with a material legal or similarly significant effect would have to give plain-language notice before deployment and, no later than thirty days after deployment, the personal characteristics analyzed and the 20 most influential characteristics
  3. Affected individuals would have rights to access and correct the personal characteristics used
  4. Anyone making a generative AI system that interacts with individuals available would have to disclose to each user that it is generative AI
  5. Developers and deployers would be jointly and severally liable for violations facilitated by the deployer's use; a developer would not be liable if the violation came from deployer misuse it took all reasonable steps to prevent and either did not intend or foresee or specifically disallowed in its disclosures
  6. A violation would be an unfair or deceptive act under HRS 480-2; no private right of action; the attorney general would adopt rules
  7. Would have taken effect upon approval; died after ECD deferred it February 6, 2026

Latest legislative action

Feb 6, 2026. The committee(s) on ECD recommend(s) that the measure be deferred.

Sponsors (showing 5 of 23)

NameRole
Primary
Primary
Primary
Primary
Primary

Topics and industries

This page is general information, not legal advice. Summaries are AI-assisted and may contain errors; read the statute for the controlling text and talk to a lawyer about your situation. Full disclaimer · Report an error