State AI law
Minnesota
AI laws
We track 40 artificial-intelligence bills and regulations in Minnesota. 9 have been signed or enacted.
Last updated Oct 16, 2026 · How we collect and check bills
Where Minnesota’s bills stand
40 bills- Introduced
- 0
- In committee
- 0
- Passed a chamber
- 0
- Signed or enacted
- 9
- Dead or vetoed
- 31
Overview
How Minnesota regulates AI
Minnesota has 40 published AI-related bills in our register, 9 of them signed or enacted. Every bill below links to its own page with the status, dates and a plain-English summary.
Industries these bills touch
Minnesota AI law guides
For reporters
As of October 16, 2026, Minnesota has enacted 9 AI laws, according to AI Laws by State. That ties for 17th most among the 50 states and D.C.
Free to quote and reuse with credit to AI Laws by State. Cite as: AI Laws by State, “Minnesota AI laws,” ailawsbystate.com/state/MN, accessed October 16, 2026.
Deepfake Laws in Minnesota
Minnesota has enacted deepfake legislation. See how it compares with other states, including penalties, scope and enforcement.
Coming into force
Signed Minnesota laws with an effective date still ahead.
All Minnesota deadlines →Minnesota AI bills
RSS feed for MinnesotaCommerce policy bill (Laws 2026, chapter 124), including article 3, section 6 barring utilization review organizations from using artificial…
Minnesota's 2026 commerce omnibus (Laws 2026, chapter 124) adds an AI rule to the state's utilization review law. Article 3, section 6 amends Minn. Stat. 62M.09, subd. 3 to prohibit a utilization review organization from exclusively using artificial intelligence to make an adverse determination on coverage of benefits; a clinician must review the denial. AI may still be used in other parts of the review process. Article 1, section 61 also routes civil penalties under the 2026 nudification ban to the victims of crime account. The rest of the act is not AI-related.
Social media platforms; requirements related to accounts for minors established
Minnesota's HF 4138 (Laws 2026, chapter 111) adds section 325M.40 on social media accounts of children under 16. Covered platforms must estimate account holders' ages and update the estimate every six months, or as often as they apply data analytics or artificial intelligence to update other demographic estimates, whichever is sooner. Children's accounts need verifiable parental consent, and platforms may not present addictive interface features, which include profile-based feeds (content selected or prioritized based on personal information), or targeted paid advertising on a child's account. Effective July 1, 2027.
Omnibus Public Safety policy bill (Laws 2026, chapter 97), including article 3, section 3 adding forged digital likenesses to the identity t…
Minnesota's Laws 2026, chapter 97 (public safety policy) brings deepfakes into identity theft law. Article 3, section 3 amends Minn. Stat. 609.527, subd. 1 to define a "forged digital likeness": a recording, image or photograph (or a technological representation derived from one) created or altered in a way that depends substantially on technical means, that misrepresents a person's appearance, speech or conduct and is realistic enough that a reasonable person would believe it depicts the actual individual. A forged digital likeness is added to the definition of identity, so using one with intent to commit an unlawful act falls under identity theft. The rest of the act is not AI-related.
An act relating to commerce; prohibiting access to nudification technology; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 325E…
Minnesota's Laws 2026, chapter 72 creates Minn. Stat. 325E.91, a ban on nudification technology. The owner or controller of a website, app, software, program or service may not let users nudify images or videos (alter or generate them to show intimate parts that a reasonable person would believe belong to an identifiable person), or nudify them on a user's behalf, and no one may advertise or promote such a service. Tools that require the user's own technical skill are exempt. Depicted people can sue, and the Attorney General can seek civil penalties of up to $500,000 per unlawful access, download or use. It took effect Aug. 1, 2026.
Surveillance-based price setting prohibited.
Not law. Minnesota's HF 3408 would have added Minn. Stat. 325D.141 barring retail food stores from surveillance-based price setting, meaning customized prices based on personal information gathered through electronic surveillance technology such as cameras, device tracking, biometrics and facial recognition. Stores using facial recognition would post entrance signage, and larger stores' electronic shelf labels could change prices only once a day. It never left committee.
Artificial intelligence chatbot technology requirements provision
Not law. SF 4997 would have barred chatbot operators in Minnesota from letting chatbots give substantive medical, mental health or legal advice that would require a license, with a private right of action that a disclaimer could not waive, and required clear notice that users are talking to AI. Companion chatbot operators would have had to use industry-standard methods to prevent self-harm content and detect minors, suspend use for at least 72 hours and show crisis contacts when self-harm appears, and would have been liable, strictly so for minors, for resulting self-harm. It was introduced April 7, 2026 and never left committee.
Delivery of professional services through artificial intelligence directly to consumers precluded, and enforcement and penalties provided.
Not law. Minnesota's HF 4979 would have added Minn. Stat. 325F.701, barring the owner of an AI model, or any business or person using one, from letting the model provide a professional service (one the state licenses, certifies or registers) to a consumer unless a credentialed person operates it during the service. A credentialed professional could still use AI as a tool. The attorney general would enforce it under section 8.31. Introduced April 16, 2026 and never left committee.
Autonomous vehicles regulated.
Not law. Minnesota's HF 3513 would have authorized level 4 and 5 autonomous vehicles to operate on public roads, with driverless operation requiring commissioner authorization and a first responder interaction plan, and at least $1,000,000 combined single limit liability coverage. It would also have let on-demand autonomous vehicle networks operate under state rules, treated the driving system as the driver, and preempted local regulation. Introduced February 19, 2026; it never left committee.
Use of automated decision systems in employment settings regulation
Not law. Minnesota's SF 4689 (1st engrossment) would have added Minn. Stat. 181.9921 to 181.9927 regulating employers' use of automated decision systems in employment. Employers would have owed workers advance and after-decision written notice, access and correction of data, human review and an appeal, and could not rely solely on such a system or use one to terminate a worker. Penalties would run up to $1,000 or $2,500 per violation, with a private right of action. Effective January 1, 2027 if enacted.
Use of artificial intelligence in psychotherapy services regulated, and civil penalties provided.
Not law. Minnesota's HF 3893 (2nd engrossment) would have added Minn. Stat. 214.165, barring anyone from offering therapy or psychotherapy to the public unless a licensed professional conducts it, and barring licensed professionals from using AI to make independent therapeutic decisions, interact with clients therapeutically, generate unreviewed treatment plans or provide assessments. AI could do only administrative support. Licensing boards could fine up to $50,000 per violation. It was re-referred to Commerce Finance and Policy on April 7, 2026 and went no further.
Artificial intelligence safety and disclosure requirements establishment (RAISE Act)
Not law. Minnesota's SF 4509, the Responsible Artificial Intelligence Safety and Education (RAISE) Act, would have added Minn. Stat. 325M.40 to 325M.42. AI model developers would have had to adopt, publish in redacted form and send to the attorney general a safety and security protocol, not deploy a model creating an unreasonable risk of critical harm, and report safety incidents within 72 hours. Civil penalties would reach $10,000,000, then $30,000,000.
Delivery of professional services preclusion through artificial intelligence directly to consumers
Not law. Minnesota's SF 4927 would have added Minn. Stat. 325F.701, barring the owner of an AI model, or any business or person using one, from letting the model provide a professional service (one the state licenses, certifies or registers) to a consumer unless a credentialed person operates it during the service. A credentialed professional could still use AI as a tool. The attorney general would enforce it under section 8.31. Introduced March 26, 2026 and never left committee.
Operation of certain autonomous vehicles and on-demand autonomous vehicle networks authorization
Not law. Minnesota's SF 4618 (1st engrossment) would have created Minn. Stat. chapter 169B letting autonomous vehicles operate with commissioner of public safety authorization, requiring at least $10,000,000 combined single limit liability coverage and independent safety verification for driverless operation. Commercial and on-demand network operations would stay prohibited until a task force reports and a permit process exists. It was re-referred to Judiciary and Public Safety on April 7, 2026.
Notice and a transitional employment period required for employees displaced by artificial intelligence, and penalties imposed
Not law. Minnesota's SF 4576 (1st engrossment) would have added Minn. Stat. 181.9937 requiring employers with the equivalent of 50 or more full-time Minnesota employees to give 90 days' written notice before technological displacement by AI or automation affecting 10 or more employees or 10 percent of a unit. Employees would get a 90-day transitional period with continued pay and retraining, with back pay and civil penalties up to $10,000 for willful violations.
Surveillance-based price and wage discrimination prohibited.
Not law. Minnesota's HF 4131 would have added Minn. Stat. 325D.141 prohibiting surveillance-based price discrimination and wage discrimination, meaning use of an automated decision system to inform individualized prices or wages from surveillance data about a consumer or worker. Listed cost, group-discount and insurer risk exceptions would apply, and wage-setters would have to disclose the data and how the system uses it. The text has no penalties or enforcer. Introduced March 9, 2026; effective August 1, 2026 if enacted.
License establishment for artificial intelligence independent verification organizations
Not law. Minnesota's SF 4636 would have added Minn. Stat. 325M.50 to 325M.54 letting the commissioner of commerce license AI independent verification organizations that assess whether AI models or applications meet standards for preventing personal injury and property damage. An advisory council would be created, and a verified model would get a rebuttable presumption against liability in injury suits. Verification would be voluntary. It never left committee.
Artificial intelligence chatbot technology requirements provided, and cause of action for harm created.
Not law. Minnesota's HF 4452 would have added Minn. Stat. 604.115 barring chatbot proprietors from letting chatbots give substantive medical, mental health or legal advice that would require a license, with a private right of action a notice could not waive, and requiring clear notice that users are talking to an AI. Companion chatbot operators would have had to suspend use for at least 72 hours and show crisis contacts on self-harm, and would be liable if they knew of it and failed to act. Introduced March 18, 2026.
Autonomous vehicles and on-demand autonomous vehicle networks operation authorized, and rulemaking authorized.
Not law. Minnesota's HF 4521 would have amended Minn. Stat. 169.011 and added sections 169.251 to 169.255 letting autonomous vehicles operate with annual commissioner of public safety authorization (not effective until July 1, 2027), at least $10,000,000 combined single limit liability coverage for driverless use, and independent safety verification. On-demand autonomous vehicle networks would need separate authorization. Fees and some deadlines were left blank. It never left committee.
License for artificial intelligence independent verification organizations established, advisory council established, rulemaking authorized,…
Not law. Minnesota's HF 4544 would have added Minn. Stat. 325M.50 to 325M.54 letting the commissioner of commerce license AI independent verification organizations that assess whether AI models or applications meet standards for preventing personal injury and property damage. An advisory council would be created, and a verified model would get a rebuttable presumption against liability in injury suits. Verification would be voluntary. It never left committee.
Artificial intelligence safety and disclosure requirements established, and civil remedies provided.
Minnesota's HF 4532, the Responsible Artificial Intelligence Safety and Education (RAISE) Act, would require developers (anyone who has trained at least one AI model) to adopt, publish and send to the attorney general a safety and security protocol before deploying a model, report safety incidents within 72 hours, and not deploy a model that creates an unreasonable risk of critical harm. Introduced and referred to Commerce Finance and Policy March 23, 2026; it died when the 2026 session adjourned.
Prohibition from using artificial intelligence to dynamically set product prices
Minnesota's SF 3098 (1st engrossment) would add Minn. Stat. 325D.141 prohibiting surveillance-based price discrimination and wage discrimination, meaning individualized prices or wages set with an automated decision system from surveillance data about a consumer or worker, and would require published procedures for data accuracy and challenges. Introduced March 27, 2025; amended and re-referred to Commerce and Consumer Protection March 18, 2026 with no recommendation. It died when the 2026 session adjourned without passing.
Use of automated decision systems in employment settings regulated.
Minnesota's HF 4445 would have required employers to give workers written notice before using an automated decision system (ADS) for employment-related decisions, with consent, human review, post-decision notice, appeal and records rules, enforced by the Commissioner of Labor and Industry and by private suits. It would have banned using ADS for facial, gait or emotion recognition. Introduced March 18, 2026 and never left committee.
Certain use of artificial intelligence prohibition provision
Minnesota's SF 4573 (2026), by Sen. Maye Quade, would have amended the Minnesota Human Rights Act (Minn. Stat. § 363A.08) to make it an unfair employment practice for an employer to use artificial intelligence that has the effect of discriminating against an employee or applicant on a protected basis, or to fail to notify them that AI is being used for those purposes. Introduced and referred to the Judiciary and Public Safety Committee March 18, 2026, it died when the session adjourned May 18, 2026.
Surveillance-based price and wage discrimination prohibition
Minnesota's SF 4233 would have prohibited using an automated decision system to set individualized prices for consumers or wages for workers based on surveillance data about them, with listed exceptions, and required anyone using such a system for prices or wages to publish procedures to check and correct the data. The text names no enforcer or penalty. Introduced March 9, 2026 and never left committee.
Certain online platforms requirement to provide information pertaining to algorithm use
Minnesota's SF 4380 would have required online platforms doing business in Minnesota that use personal-data-based algorithmic recommender systems to publicly disclose each system's inputs and weights (grouped in quartiles), default to maximizing users' long-term value, give users controls over recommended and blocked item types, and keep a holdout group with an annual public disclosure and independent audit. Violations would have been an unfair and deceptive practice, with the attorney general able to enforce and users able to recover $5,000 per violation. It was introduced March 11, 2026 and never left committee.
Advisory board established to study impacts of commercial autonomous vehicle operations implementation, minimum requirements for operation o…
Minnesota's HF 4216 would have barred commercial autonomous vehicle operations until an advisory board's study is complete and the commissioner sets up a permit process, and would have required a permit for any entity to begin such operations. Permitted autonomous vehicles carrying passengers or goods would have needed a human safety operator physically present who can take control. Introduced March 12, 2026 and never left committee.
Prohibit surveillance-based price setting
Minnesota's SF 4199 would have prohibited retail food stores from surveillance-based price setting, meaning customized prices based on personal information gathered through electronic surveillance such as cameras, sensors, biometric data or facial recognition. It would also have required facial recognition signage and limited electronic shelf label price changes. Introduced March 9, 2026 and never left committee.
Acquisition and use of facial recognition technology by government entities prohibited.
Minnesota's HF 3146 would have barred state and local government entities, law enforcement agencies and officials from obtaining, retaining, accessing or using face surveillance systems or their information, or contracting with private entities to do so. Evidence from violations would have been inadmissible, and people could sue for damages of at least $1,000 or $100 per violation, whichever is greater, plus injunctions. Introduced April 7, 2025 and referred to Public Safety Finance and Policy and it never left committee.
Algorithm and AI use prohibited during health insurance prior authorization request review.
Minnesota's HF 2500 would have barred a health carrier from using an algorithm or artificial intelligence program when deciding whether to approve or deny a prior authorization request. It would have applied to health plans offered, sold, issued or renewed on or after January 1, 2026. Introduced March 17, 2025 and referred to Commerce Finance and Policy and it never left committee.
Acquisition and use of facial recognition technology by government entities prohibited.
Minnesota's HF 3661 would have barred state and local government entities, law enforcement agencies and officials from obtaining, retaining, accessing or using face surveillance systems or their information, or contracting with private entities to do so. Evidence from violations would have been inadmissible, and people could sue for damages of at least $1,000 or $100 per violation, whichever is greater, plus injunctions. Introduced February 23, 2026 and referred to Judiciary Finance and Civil Law and it never left committee.
Online platforms required to provide information pertaining to algorithm use, design transparency and user choice required, civil penalties …
Minnesota's HF 3980 would have required online platforms doing business in Minnesota that use personal-data-based algorithmic recommender systems to publicly disclose each system's inputs and weights (grouped in quartiles), default to maximizing users' long-term value, give users controls over recommended and blocked item types, and keep a holdout group with an annual public disclosure and independent audit. Violations would have been an unfair and deceptive practice, with the attorney general able to enforce and users able to recover $5,000 per violation. It was introduced March 5, 2026 and never left committee.
Constitutional amendment proposal excluding artificial intelligence from the right to free speech
Minnesota's SF 4114 would have put to voters a constitutional amendment adding a sentence to article I, section 3 stating that the constitutional right to freely speak, write and publish does not apply to artificial intelligence, at the 2026 general election. It would not itself have changed the law; the amendment would have needed voter approval. It does not define artificial intelligence. Introduced March 4, 2026 and never left committee.
Prior authorization usage of algorithms or artificial intelligence prohibition provision
Minnesota's SF 3984 would have barred a health carrier from using an algorithm or artificial intelligence program when deciding whether to approve or deny a prior authorization request. It would have applied to health plans offered, sold, issued or renewed on or after January 1, 2026. Introduced February 26, 2026 and referred to Commerce and Consumer Protection and it never left committee.
Judiciary, public safety, and corrections policy and finance bill (Laws 2025, chapter 35), including article 4, section 12 on child sexual a…
Minnesota's 2025 judiciary and public safety omnibus (Laws 2025, chapter 35) brings AI-generated material into the state's child sexual abuse material laws. Article 4, section 12 amends Minn. Stat. 617.246, subd. 1: child sexual abuse material now includes any visual depiction, including a computer-generated image, of an individual indistinguishable from an actual minor created with generative AI or other prompt-driven computer technology engaging in sexual conduct, if obscene. Article 4, section 13 gives interactive computer services and telecommunications providers immunity for specified actions tied to the new AI-material offense. The rest of the act is not AI-related.
Use of facial recognition technology as part of the driver's license and Minnesota identification card application process required.
Minnesota's HF 560 would have required the commissioner of public safety to use facial recognition on every driver's license and Minnesota ID application or renewal to prevent multiple issuances and identification fraud, comparing applicants' faces with state, FBI and other law enforcement databases. A confirmed match would have blocked issuance and been referred to law enforcement. Introduced February 13, 2025 and never left committee.
Prohibiting Social Media Manipulation Act (commerce omnibus, Laws 2024, chapter 114, article 3)
Minnesota's Prohibiting Social Media Manipulation Act, enacted in the 2024 commerce omnibus (Laws 2024, chapter 114, article 3, sections 63 to 67, now Minn. Stat. 325M.30 to 325M.34), requires social media platforms to publicly and conspicuously post how they limit excessive account interactions, an explanation of how they assess content quality and users' expressed preferences and how those assessments are used and weighted in each of the platform's algorithmic ranking systems, and usage statistics by percentile of account holders. The provisions took effect July 1, 2025.
Elections policy and finance bill (Laws 2024, chapter 112), including article 2, sections 63-64 and 76-78 amending the election deep fake cr…
Minnesota's 2024 elections omnibus (Laws 2024, chapter 112) rewrites parts of the 2023 election deep fake crime, Minn. Stat. 609.771. Under article 2, section 76, disseminating a deep fake of a candidate without consent to injure the candidate or influence an election is a crime if done with knowledge or reckless disregard that it is a deep fake, within 90 days before a party nominating convention or after absentee voting begins; broadcasters required by federal law to air a candidate's ad are exempt. Sections 63-64 and 77 require a convicted candidate to forfeit the nomination or office and bar appointment to it, and section 78 revises who may seek injunctive relief.
Acquisition and use prohibition of facial recognition technology by government entities
Minnesota's SF 129 (93rd Legislature) would have barred state and local government entities, law enforcement agencies and officials from obtaining, retaining, accessing or using face surveillance systems or their information, or contracting with private entities to do so. People could have sued for damages of at least $1,000 or $100 per violation, whichever is greater, plus injunctions. Introduced January 11, 2023 and never left committee.
An act relating to public safety; establishing a cause of action for nonconsensual dissemination of deep fake sexual images; establishing th…
Minnesota's HF 1370 (Chapter 58) creates a civil claim (Minn. Stat. 604.32) and a crime (617.262) for disseminating without consent a deep fake that realistically depicts an identifiable person's intimate parts or sexual acts, and a crime (609.771) for disseminating a deep fake without consent to injure a candidate or influence an election. The election crime was amended in 2024 (2024 c 112) and now applies within 90 days before a political party nominating convention or after absentee voting starts for a primary or election. Signed May 26, 2023; effective August 1, 2023.
An act relating to public safety; ... regulating the use of unmanned aerial vehicles by law enforcement ... (Laws 2020, chapter 82)
Minnesota's Laws 2020, chapter 82 created Minn. Stat. 626.19 on law enforcement use of unmanned aerial vehicles (drones). Drones generally require a warrant, with listed exceptions, and under subdivision 4(b) an agency must not deploy a drone with facial recognition or other biometric-matching technology unless expressly authorized by a warrant. Agencies also may not arm drones or use them to collect data on protests without a warrant, evidence gathered in violation is inadmissible, and agencies must adopt written policies by Feb. 15, 2021. Section 626.19 took effect Aug. 1, 2020.
Get an email when Minnesota AI bills change
We’ll email you when AI bills in Minnesota 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.