State AI law
Massachusetts
AI laws
We track 44 artificial-intelligence bills and regulations in Massachusetts. 2 have been signed or enacted, and 30 are still moving.
Last updated Oct 14, 2026 · How we collect and check bills
Where Massachusetts’s bills stand
44 bills- Introduced
- 3
- In committee
- 26
- Passed a chamber
- 1
- Signed or enacted
- 2
- Dead or vetoed
- 12
Overview
How Massachusetts regulates AI
Massachusetts has 44 published AI-related bills in our register, 2 of them signed or enacted. Every bill below links to its own page with the status, dates and a plain-English summary.
Massachusetts AI law guides
Deepfake Laws in Massachusetts
Massachusetts has enacted deepfake legislation. See how it compares with other states, including penalties, scope and enforcement.
Massachusetts AI bills
RSS feed for MassachusettsRelative to providing multimodal transportation technologies
Not law. S 2379 would have allowed fully autonomous vehicles (SAE Level 4 or 5) to drive on Massachusetts highways without a human driver once licensed by MassDOT, if they can reach a minimal-risk condition after a system failure and follow traffic laws. Vehicles of 10,000 pounds or more would still need a human driver aboard; owners would file a law-enforcement interaction plan and carry $1 million in liability coverage, and on-demand autonomous ride networks would be allowed. It was sent to a study order on July 31, 2026, ending it for the session.
Relative to the safety of autonomous vehicles
Massachusetts H3669 would add G.L. c. 90, s. 19M requiring registered autonomous vehicles to keep meeting federal motor vehicle standards and barring their use for interstate commerce or passenger or goods transport unless a human safety operator is physically in the vehicle. It did not advance as its own bill: on April 9, 2026 it accompanied study order H5328.
Relative to providing multimodal transportation technologies
Massachusetts' H 3634 would add a framework in General Laws chapter 90 to let fully autonomous vehicles run on public roads without a human driver. Each vehicle would need an autonomous operation license from MassDOT and, before driverless operation, proof of $1 million in liability coverage and a law-enforcement interaction plan. On-demand autonomous vehicle networks would be allowed and local rules on them preempted. Referred to Transportation February 27, 2025; on April 6, 2026 it accompanied a study order (H 5326) and did not advance as its own bill.
Relative to the use of artificial intelligence and other software tools in healthcare decision-making
Massachusetts S2632 would bar AI from denying, delaying or modifying health care on medical-necessity grounds, requiring a licensed professional to decide, and would limit AI in therapy: licensed therapists may use it only for administrative or supplementary support, with civil penalties up to $10,000 per violation. Committee recommended ought to pass and referred to Senate Ways and Means April 2, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Establishing an internet bill of rights
Massachusetts H1754 would add G.L. Chapter 93M, an 'Internet Bill of Rights' comprehensive data protection law, including a right not to be subject to decisions based solely on automated processing, including profiling, with legal or similarly significant effects. It did not advance as its own bill: on March 26, 2026 it accompanied study order H5281 (under House Rule 27).
Reducing emissions from artificial intelligence
Massachusetts' H 495 would add a new Chapter 93M to the General Laws. Search-engine operators with more than $10 million in revenue could not return AI-generated results unless the user gave affirmative consent. The state would study AI's environmental impacts, and companies that develop or power AI systems would have to report their annual environmental impacts or face penalties up to $20,000 a year. Referred to the Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies February 27, 2025; on March 5, 2026 it accompanied a study order (H 5178) and did not advance as its own bill.
An Act enhancing disclosure requirements for synthetic media in political advertising
Massachusetts' H 5094, as reported by House Ways and Means, would require paid audio or video political communications that contain AI-generated synthetic media to say "contains content generated by AI" at the beginning and end and to carry an AI-generated label throughout each synthetic portion. A violation would be punished by a fine of up to $1,000. The House adopted Amendment 4 (not reviewed here) and passed the bill to be engrossed 157-0 on February 11, 2026. The Senate referred it to Senate Ways and Means on February 12, 2026; it is not law.
Enhancing disclosure requirements for synthetic media in political advertising
Massachusetts H846 would require paid audio or video political communications that contain synthetic media (content substantially produced by generative AI) to carry AI disclosure labels at the beginning and end and throughout the synthetic portions, with fines up to $1,000. On February 11, 2026 new draft H5094 was substituted; H5094 passed the House 157-0 that day and was referred to Senate Ways and Means February 12, 2026.
Relative to AI health communications and informed patient consent
Massachusetts' H 1210 would give patients the right to be told when health information they get was generated by AI, with instructions for reaching a human provider if the provider had not reviewed it. Health insurance carriers would have to disclose AI or automated decision tools used in claims review and file an annual report on AI algorithms and training data used in utilization review, with a bias attestation. Referred to Financial Services February 27, 2025; on February 9, 2026 it accompanied a study order (H 5066) and did not advance as its own bill.
Relative to issuing guidance regarding setting policies for the use of AI in schools
Massachusetts' H 614 would require the Commissioner of Elementary and Secondary Education to issue guidelines for school districts and charter schools on student and teacher use of AI. The guidance would cover AI's benefits and limitations, safe use, equity implications and factors for setting school AI policies, after at least three public hearings. Referred to the Education Committee February 27, 2025; hearing November 12, 2025; reporting date extended to March 18, 2026. It has not passed either chamber.
Fostering artificial intelligence responsibility
Massachusetts H77 would add G.L. Chapter 149B limiting employers' electronic monitoring and use of automated decision systems (independent impact assessments, 10 business days' notice, human oversight, no primary reliance for hiring, discipline or pay), and bar state agencies from using such systems for benefits or rights decisions unless authorized by law. Reported favorably and referred to House Ways and Means December 24, 2025; it has not passed either chamber.
Protecting consumers in interactions with artificial intelligence systems
Massachusetts's H 97 would add Chapter 93M requiring developers and deployers of high-risk AI systems (those making or substantially influencing decisions on education, employment, finance, government services, health care, housing, insurance or legal services) to use reasonable care against algorithmic discrimination, with documentation, risk programs, impact assessments and consumer notices, and requiring disclosure when consumers interact with AI. Reported favorably and referred to House Ways and Means December 24, 2025; it has not passed either house.
To ensure accountability and transparency in artificial intelligence systems
Massachusetts H94 would add G.L. Chapter 93M requiring developers and deployers of high-risk AI systems used in consequential decisions (education, employment, lending, housing, health care, insurance, legal and government services) to guard against algorithmic discrimination, with Attorney General enforcement. On December 24, 2025 it accompanied H97, which was reported favorably and referred to House Ways and Means.
An Act advancing the economic development of the commonwealth through comprehensive data privacy
Massachusetts' S 301 would add a new chapter 93M to the General Laws, the Massachusetts Information Privacy and Security Act, a comprehensive data privacy law with defined terms such as consent (which excludes dark patterns), controller, data broker and biometric information. In the captured text, a large data holder's risk assessment would also have to say whether processing relies on an algorithmic process, such as machine learning or AI, and describe its design, input data and outputs. The bill accompanied a study order on December 18, 2025 and did not advance.
Establishing protections for consumers interacting with artificial intelligence chatbots
Massachusetts S264 would add G.L. Chapter 93M requiring any commercial entity that deploys a chatbot to clearly and conspicuously disclose that the user is dealing with a chatbot and not a human, and making chatbot statements legally equivalent to those of an employee or agent. Reported favorably and referred to Senate Ways and Means December 18, 2025; it has not passed either chamber.
To establish a commission to investigate AI in education
Not law. S 429 would have created a commission in the Massachusetts Executive Office of Education to study AI in schools and recommend regulations, limits, standards and safeguards. It would have surveyed how public and private school systems use generative AI and automated decision systems (for grading, scheduling, lesson planning and budgeting), examined bias, transparency, data protection, plagiarism and a possible watermark requirement, and produced guidelines for ethical use. On December 4, 2025 it was sent to a study order (S 2792), ending it for the 2025-2026 session.
To promote transparency of facial recognition and driver's license photos
Massachusetts S1731 would add G.L. c. 90, s. 8N requiring the Registry of Motor Vehicles to post notices at licensing offices, give applicants written information and publish website information on how officers use and access targeted face recognition on driver's license and ID photos in criminal investigations. It did not advance as its own bill: on December 4, 2025 it accompanied study order S2798.
Requiring consumer notification for chatbot systems
Massachusetts's S 243 (194th General Court) would add G.L. c. 93, section 115, declaring it an unfair and deceptive act under chapter 93A for a person, in a commercial transaction or trade practice with a consumer, to use a bot (such as a chatbot or AI agent) that may mislead a reasonable person into believing they are dealing with a human, whether or not anyone is actually misled. A person is not liable if the consumer is clearly and conspicuously told they are communicating with a computer. Reported favorably by the Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure Committee November 19, 2025 and referred to Senate Ways and Means; it has not passed either house.
Establishing the Massachusetts consumer data privacy act
Massachusetts H 78 would create the Massachusetts Consumer Data Privacy Act, giving consumers rights over personal data, including opting out of profiling for solely automated decisions with legal or similarly significant effects. After a hearing on April 9, 2025, the committee folded it into new draft H4746 on November 17, 2025, which was referred to House Ways and Means; the page shows no later action. Separately, Senate bill S2619 is in a conference committee (June 2026). Neither bill has passed both houses.
Establishing the Comprehensive Massachusetts Consumer Data Privacy Act
Massachusetts H80 would add G.L. Chapter 93M, the Massachusetts Consumer Privacy Act, giving consumers rights to access, correct, delete and port data and to opt out of targeted advertising, sales and profiling for solely automated decisions with legal or similarly significant effects. Referred to the Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity Committee February 27, 2025; on November 17, 2025 it accompanied new draft H4746, which was referred to House Ways and Means that day.
To provide accountability in the use of biometric recognition technology and comprehensive enforcement
Massachusetts H96 would add G.L. Chapter 110I regulating biometric recognition technology: covered entities that collect or process biometric data owe duties of loyalty, care and confidentiality, may not sell it, and may not install biometric recognition equipment in places open to the public. Referred to the Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity Committee February 27, 2025; on November 17, 2025 it accompanied new draft H4746, which was referred to House Ways and Means that day.
Establishing the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act
Massachusetts H104 would add G.L. Chapter 93M (the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act) and Chapter 93N (location data). Individuals could access, correct, delete and port covered data and opt out of profiling used for automated decisions with legal or similarly significant effects; biometric data is sensitive data. Referred to the Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity Committee February 27, 2025; on November 17, 2025 it accompanied new draft H4746, which was referred to House Ways and Means that day.
To implement the recommendations of the special commission on facial recognition technology
Massachusetts H4640, a new draft of H1946, would replace G.L. c. 6, s. 220 to bar law enforcement from using facial recognition and other biometric surveillance except for State Police searches under set conditions (registrar identity checks, judge-authorized felony warrant, emergency, deceased identification, another agency's request). Reported favorably by the Judiciary Committee and referred to House Ways and Means October 23, 2025; it has not passed either chamber.
To implement the recommendations of the special commission on facial recognition technology
Massachusetts H1946 would replace G.L. c. 6, s. 220 to bar law enforcement from using facial recognition and other biometric surveillance except for State Police searches under set conditions (judge-authorized felony warrant, emergency, deceased identification). Referred to the Judiciary Committee February 27, 2025; on October 23, 2025 it accompanied new draft H4640, which was reported favorably and referred to House Ways and Means.
To implement the recommendations of the special commission on facial recognition technology
Massachusetts S1053 would replace G.L. c. 6, s. 220 to bar law enforcement from using facial recognition and other biometric surveillance except for State Police searches under set conditions (judge-authorized felony warrant, emergency, deceased identification, another agency's request). Reported favorably by the Judiciary Committee and referred to Senate Ways and Means September 29, 2025; it has not passed either chamber.
Promoting economic development with emerging artificial intelligence models and safety
Massachusetts' S 37 would create an Artificial Intelligence Innovation Trust Fund for grants to AI developers and research, and a new Chapter 93M on frontier AI models. Developers of covered models (trained with more than 10^26 operations costing over $100 million) would need safety protocols, annual third-party reviews and 72-hour incident reports to the attorney general. The committee reported a new draft, S 2630, instead of S 37 on October 16, 2025; S 37 itself did not advance.
To protect against election misinformation
Massachusetts S44 would bar distributing, with actual malice, a materially deceptive election-related communication within 90 days of an election, with injunctions and damages as remedies; it defines synthetic media as audio or video substantially produced by generative AI. On October 16, 2025 it accompanied new draft S2631, which was referred to Senate Ways and Means that day.
To protect against election misinformation
Massachusetts S2631 would bar distributing, with actual malice, a materially deceptive election-related communication within 90 days of an election, with injunctions and damages as remedies; it defines synthetic media as audio or video substantially produced by generative AI. Reported favorably and referred to Senate Ways and Means October 16, 2025; it has not passed either chamber.
Relative to AI-generated child sexual abuse material
Massachusetts S2633 would add G.L. c. 272, s. 29E making it a crime to create 'child sexual abuse visual material', including computer-generated images altered to falsely appear to be an authentic depiction of a minor, with knowledge or reason to know the subject is a minor and lascivious intent; up to 10 years in state prison or a $10,000 to $50,000 fine. Referred to Senate Ways and Means October 16, 2025.
Promoting economic development with emerging artificial intelligence models and safety
Massachusetts S2630 would create an AI Innovation Trust Fund and the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act (G.L. Chapter 93M). Large frontier developers (over $500,000,000 revenue, models trained with over 10^26 operations) would have to publish safety frameworks, and critical safety incidents would be reported to the Attorney General within 15 days. Reported favorably and referred to Senate Ways and Means October 16, 2025; it has not passed either chamber.
Relative to social media, algorithm accountability, and transparency
Massachusetts's S.51 (194th General Court) would create an Office of Social Media Transparency and Accountability under the Attorney General. Covered platforms (processing personal information of 100,000+ Massachusetts consumers, or 25,000+ with over 25% of gross revenue from selling personal data) would register annually, file transparency reports and pay for monthly third-party algorithm risk audits focused on harms to children. Penalties of up to $500,000 per violation. Reported favorably by the Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity Committee October 16, 2025 and sent to Senate Ways and Means; not passed.
Relative to AI-generated child sexual abuse material
Massachusetts' S 48 would amend the child pornography laws in General Laws chapter 272 (sections 29C and 31) so that "visual material" includes material produced by digitization: the creation or alteration of visual material, including with computer-generated images, so that it would appear to a reasonable person to depict a minor. The committee reported a new draft, S 2633, instead of S 48 on October 16, 2025; S 48 itself did not advance.
Relative to the use of artificial intelligence and other software tools in healthcare decision-making
Massachusetts S46 would amend G.L. c. 176O, s. 12 so that insurers using AI, algorithms or software for medical-necessity review may not let the tool deny, delay or modify care; only a licensed physician or competent licensed professional may decide. On October 16, 2025 it accompanied new draft S2632, which on April 2, 2026 was sent to Senate Ways and Means with an ought-to-pass recommendation.
Establishing the Massachusetts data privacy act
Massachusetts S2516 would add G.L. Chapter 93M (Massachusetts Data Privacy Act) and Chapter 93N (Location Shield Act), with consumer rights including opt-out of profiling for solely automated significant decisions. Reported to Senate Ways and Means May 12, 2025. On September 25, 2025 the Senate substituted new draft S2608, which, reprinted as S2619, passed the Senate 40-0; the House passed it with an amendment 146-0 on June 4, 2026, and a conference committee was appointed (Senate June 11, House June 17, 2026). It has not been enacted.
Relative to cybersecurity and artificial intelligence
Massachusetts S49 is a broad cybersecurity bill that would require annual cybersecurity training for public employees, create a Cybersecurity Control Board and state cybersecurity code (artificial intelligence is one listed standards area), and create an Automated Decision Making Control Board to study and regulate automated decision systems. Reported favorably and referred to Senate Ways and Means May 12, 2025.
To establish the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act
Massachusetts S29 would add G.L. Chapter 93M (Massachusetts Data Privacy Protection Act) and Chapter 93N (location data), giving individuals a right to opt out of profiling that produces legal or similarly significant effects. Referred to committee February 27, 2025; on May 12, 2025 it accompanied new draft S2516 (reported to Senate Ways and Means that day; replaced by S2608 on September 25, 2025).
Establishing the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act
Massachusetts S45 would add G.L. Chapter 93M (Massachusetts Data Privacy Act) and Chapter 93N (location data), with an opt-out of profiling used for automated decisions with legal or similarly significant effects. Referred to committee February 27, 2025; on May 12, 2025 it was folded into new draft S2516 (reported to Senate Ways and Means that day; replaced by S2608 on September 25, 2025).
To provide accountability in the use of biometric recognition technology and comprehensive enforcement
Massachusetts S36 would add G.L. Chapter 110I regulating biometric recognition technology: covered entities owe duties of loyalty, care and confidentiality, may not sell biometric data, and may not install biometric recognition equipment in places open to the public. Referred to committee February 27, 2025; on May 12, 2025 it accompanied S43 (An Act to protect personal biometric data), which was referred to Senate Ways and Means.
Establishing the Comprehensive Massachusetts Consumer Data Privacy Act
Massachusetts S 33 would create a comprehensive consumer data privacy act. After a joint committee hearing on April 9, 2025, the committee folded it into new draft S2516 on May 12, 2025, so S33 itself does not move further. The successor, redrafted as S2608 and passed by the Senate 40-0 on September 25, 2025 as S2619, would let consumers opt out of profiling for solely automated decisions with legal or similarly significant effects. The House passed different text on June 4, 2026 and a conference committee was appointed in June 2026; nothing is law.
An Act to implement the recommendations of the special commission on facial recognition technology
Massachusetts' H 4359 (193rd General Court, 2023-2024) would have made it unlawful for law enforcement to use biometric surveillance technology, including facial recognition, absent express legal authorization. The registrar of motor vehicles could use facial recognition to verify identity for licenses, and State Police could run searches for limited purposes such as a judge-authorized warrant for a felony or an emergency. Reported by Judiciary and sent to House Ways and Means on February 12, 2024, it saw no further action and died with the session.
An Act to prevent abuse and exploitation
Massachusetts Chapter 118 of the Acts of 2024 criminalizes non-consensual distribution of intimate images, including fabricated ones. Under G.L. c.265 s.43A(b), knowingly distributing visual material, including material produced by "digitization" (creating or altering images, including through computer-generated images, so they falsely appear authentic), that shows an identifiable person nude, partially nude or in sexual conduct, with intent to harm or reckless disregard of harm or lack of consent, is criminal harassment. The act also creates an Attorney General sexting diversion program.
An Act regulating the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in providing mental health services
Massachusetts' H 1974 (193rd General Court, 2023-2024) would have required a licensed mental health professional who wants to provide mental health services through AI to first seek approval from the relevant licensing board, keep the AI system continuously monitored, tell patients in advance, get their informed consent and offer them treatment from a licensed professional. A violation would bring licensing-board discipline. The bill accompanied a study order on June 6, 2024 and died when the session ended.
To protect biometric information
Massachusetts H 63 (2023-2024) would have added a new chapter 93M to the General Laws restricting how private entities collect and process biometric information, including face geometry, with consent, a written privacy policy and a ban on monetizing the data. It did not pass: on May 13, 2024 the committee folded it into new draft H4632 (the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act), which was sent to House Ways and Means and recorded 'No further action taken' on December 31, 2024, when the session ended.
An Act relative to justice, equity and accountability in law enforcement in the Commonwealth
Massachusetts' 2020 police reform law (Chapter 253 of the Acts of 2020) regulates police use of facial recognition. Under new G.L. c.6 s.220, a law enforcement agency may perform or request a facial recognition search only through a written request to the Registry of Motor Vehicles, State Police or FBI, and only with a court order, except to identify a deceased person or in an emergency. Each search must be documented and reported quarterly to the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security. Section 220 took effect July 1, 2021; a special commission was set up to study government use of facial recognition.
Get an email when Massachusetts AI bills change
We’ll email you when AI bills in Massachusetts are introduced or change status (at most one alert email a day), plus our weekly digest.
We’ll send a confirmation link first; nothing else is sent until you confirm. Unsubscribe anytime. Need alerts for specific bills only? Per-bill alerts come with Pro.