WA HB2157: Regulating high-risk artificial intelligence system development, deployment, and use.

In one paragraph

Washington's HB 2157 (Substitute House Bill, 2026 session) would have required developers and deployers of high-risk AI systems, those specifically intended to make, or be a substantial factor in making, consequential decisions such as employment, lending, housing, insurance, health care and education, to use reasonable care against algorithmic discrimination, with developer documentation, deployer risk programs and impact assessments, consumer notices, and private lawsuits. It died when the session adjourned March 12, 2026, after the House Rules "X" file on February 19.

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 required developers and deployers of high-risk AI used for consequential decisions to document, assess and disclose their systems, with private lawsuits for violations.

Key provisions

1. 1High-risk AI system: one specifically intended to autonomously make, or be a substantial factor in making, a consequential decision (parole, education, employment, financial services, health care, housing, insurance, marital status, legal services)
2. 2Developers (doing business in Washington, over $100,000 in annual revenue) would have owed reasonable care, plus a statement of intended uses and documentation of limitations, evaluation and mitigation, and updates within 90 days of an intentional and substantial modification
3. 3Developers of high-risk generative AI would have had to make synthetic content outputs identifiable and detectable, with exceptions (Sec. 2)
4. 4Deployers would have needed a risk management policy and program and an impact assessment before use, keeping records for three years (Sec. 3)
5. 5Deployers would have had to tell consumers they are interacting with an AI system and give the principal reasons for adverse decisions based on personal information beyond what the consumer provided
6. 6Exemptions included HIPAA covered entities and Title 48 RCW insurers supervised by the insurance commissioner or a comparable federal regulator; financial institutions subject to the Equal Credit Opportunity Act would be deemed compliant (Sec. 4)
7. 7A person could have sued a developer or deployer for an injunction and attorneys' fees and costs; it would be an affirmative defense to discover a violation, cure it within 45 days, give the plaintiff notice with evidence of the cure, and otherwise comply (Sec. 5)
8. 8Would have taken effect January 1, 2027. Reported from committee January 27, 2026; Rules "X" file February 19; died at adjournment March 12, 2026

Latest legislative action

Feb 19, 2026. House Rules "X" file.

Sponsors (showing 5 of 30)