AI liability laws address who is legally responsible when AI systems cause harm — developers, deployers, or users. These bills establish frameworks for tort liability, product liability, professional malpractice, and regulatory enforcement when AI systems produce adverse outcomes.
An act relating to data brokers and personal information
Vermont's H.211 (Act 138 of 2026) overhauls Vermont's data broker law, with higher fees and fines, checks before brokers disclose data, and a data broker breach-notice law. Its AI-relevant provision is in the annual registration under 9 V.S.A. § 2446: a data broker must state whether, in the past year, it shared consumers' data with or sold it to a developer of a generative AI ("GenAI") system or model, alongside disclosures about sales to foreign actors, governments and law enforcement. The act defines a GenAI system as an AI system that can generate synthetic text, images, video and audio. These provisions take effect January 1, 2027.
South Carolina Social Media Regulation Act
South Carolina's H. 3431 (Act No. 96 of 2026) adds an Age-Appropriate Code Design chapter (S.C. Code Title 39, Chapter 80) for online services, including AI-based ones, meeting revenue or data thresholds and reasonably likely to be accessed by minors. They must use reasonable care to prevent listed harms to minors, offer tools to turn off features like infinite scroll and autoplay, let users opt out of personalized recommendation systems (the default for known minors), minimize minors' data, limit profiling of known minors, stop targeted ads to minors, provide parental tools and publish annual independent audits. The Attorney General enforces. Signed February 5, 2026; effective on approval.
Establishes criteria for the use of automated employment decision tools; provides for enforcement for violations of such criteria.
New York's S 4394-A would add Labor Law Article 20-D (§§ 750-757) for automated employment decision tools, AI systems specifically developed, marketed or modified to be the controlling factor in a decision to hire, promote or terminate. Deployers may not use them in a way that violates Executive Law Article 15; deployers and developers must perform impact assessments within one year and annually, keep governance programs and give notice to individuals. The Attorney General enforces after notice and a 45-day cure period. Referred to Labor January 7, 2026.
relative to the use of artificial intelligence to provide services requiring a professional license.
New Hampshire's SB 640 (2026), as amended by the Senate, would bar anyone from offering mental health or therapy services, including through AI, unless provided by a New Hampshire licensed mental health professional, reenact RSA 310:13 on unlicensed practice with a $10,000 civil penalty per violation, and create a review commission. It passed the Senate March 12, 2026; the House voted it Inexpedient to Legislate on May 14, 2026.
Companion chatbots: crisis interruption pauses.
California's AB 1988, the Preventing AI User Self Endangerment (PAUSE) Act, would have required companion chatbot operators to adopt a public policy for credible crisis expressions (intent to harm self or others), warn the user on the first one, and on a second within 72 hours start a crisis interruption pause that continues until a human moderator reviews the chat. It passed the Assembly 73-0 on May 21, 2026; its three Senate committee hearings (June 12, 22 and 26) were canceled at the author's request, and the bill died. It did not become law.
Prohibit Surveillance Price & Wage Setting
Colorado's HB 26-1210 would have banned individualized price and wage setting: using an algorithm that applies statistical modeling, data analytics, AI or similar techniques to surveillance data about a person's characteristics, online behavior or biometrics, as more than a de minimis factor in the price offered to a consumer or the wage offered to a worker. Cost-based, supply-and-demand, public-discount, loyalty and need-based pricing, consumer-report credit refusals, and wages based solely on seniority or hired-for tasks and performance with plain-language disclosure, would have been allowed. Violations would have been deceptive trade practices. Vetoed by the Governor on June 2, 2026.
Creates a temporary state commission to study and investigate how to regulate artificial intelligence, robotics and automation; repeals such commission.
New York's S 8138-A (2023-2024) would have created a temporary state commission to study and investigate how to regulate artificial intelligence, robotics and automation. Fourteen members would study subjects such as current law, civil and criminal liability, employment and public-sector uses and issue a final report, with the act expiring December 31, 2025. The Senate passed it 59-0 on May 8, 2024, but it stalled in the Assembly and died when the 2023-2024 session ended.
Updates the definition of cyberbullying in the dignity for all students act to include intentionally using artificial intelligence to mimic or alter a person's likeness or voice without their consent.
New York's S 10049 would amend Education Law section 11(8) so that the definition of cyberbullying (harassment or bullying through electronic communication) includes, but is not limited to, intentionally using artificial intelligence to mimic or alter a person's likeness or voice without their consent. It sets no penalty, enforcer or private right of action. The Senate passed it 60 to 0 on May 28, 2026 and delivered it to the Assembly, where it was referred to Education; it takes effect immediately if enacted.
Data brokers: data collection and deletion.
California's SB 361 expands what data brokers must report when registering with the California Privacy Protection Agency. Registrations must say whether the broker collects data such as account logins, government ID numbers, citizenship or immigration status, union membership, sexual orientation, gender identity or biometric data, and whether in the past year it shared or sold consumers' data to a developer of a generative AI system or model, a foreign actor, governments or law enforcement. Signed October 8, 2025 (Chapter 466); effective January 1, 2026.
Consumer Protection and Labor and Employment - Surveillance-Based Price and Wage Setting - Prohibition
Maryland's HB 148 (2026) would have barred surveillance-based price setting (new Commercial Law section 14-1330) and surveillance-based wage setting (new Labor and Employment section 3-718): using surveillance data with an automated decision system to offer or inform a customized price or wage for an individual or group. It was pre-filed August 14, 2025, introduced January 14, 2026 and referred to Economic Matters, where the last recorded action was a February 10 hearing notice. It died when the 2026 session ended.
Vehicle Laws - Fully Autonomous Vehicles
Maryland's SB 909 (2026, first reader text, cross-filed with HB 1295) would have allowed fully autonomous vehicles to operate without a human driver on Maryland highways if they meet safety, first responder plan and insurance requirements, including at least $1,000,000 combined single limit liability coverage when the automated system is engaged. It would have barred state and local bans on such vehicles. It had a Senate hearing set for March 4, 2026 and died when the 2026 session ended.
Vehicle Laws - Fully Autonomous Vehicles
Maryland's HB 1295 (2026, first reader text, cross-filed with SB 909) would have allowed fully autonomous vehicles to operate without a human driver on Maryland highways if they meet safety, first responder plan and insurance requirements, including at least $1,000,000 combined single limit liability coverage when the automated system is engaged. It would have barred state and local bans on such vehicles. It had a House hearing set for March 5, 2026 and died when the 2026 session ended.
Algorithmic Addiction Fund - Establishment
Maryland's SB 602 (2026, first reader text, cross-filed with HB 715) would have created the Algorithmic Addiction Fund, administered by the Maryland Department of Health, to hold civil penalties the State receives from judgments or settlements over harm to children from social media and improper use of algorithms, for prevention, intervention and treatment programs. The fund would start only after such a judgment or settlement. It had a Senate Finance hearing set for February 24, 2026 and died when the 2026 session ended.
Algorithmic Addiction Fund – Establishment
Maryland's HB 715 (2026, first reader text, cross-filed with SB 602) would have created the Algorithmic Addiction Fund, administered by the Maryland Department of Health, to hold civil penalties the State receives from judgments or settlements over harm to children from social media and improper use of algorithms, for prevention, intervention and treatment programs. The fund would start only after such a judgment or settlement. It had a hearing set for March 10, 2026 in House Appropriations and died when the 2026 session ended.
Law Enforcement – Use of Facial Recognition Technology – Images Captured by Camera Affixed to Dwelling Exterior
Maryland's HB 762 (2026, first reader text) would have added an exception to Criminal Procedure section 2-503 letting law enforcement use facial recognition technology on images captured by a camera affixed to a dwelling's exterior by the dwelling's owner or lawful tenant, to investigate arson, burglary and trespass offenses. It had a House Judiciary hearing set for February 24, 2026 and died when the 2026 session ended.
Consumer Protection - High-Risk Artificial Intelligence - Developer and Deployer Requirements
Maryland's SB 936 (2025) would have added Commercial Law sections 14-47A-01 to 14-47A-08 requiring developers and deployers of high-risk AI systems used for consequential decisions to use reasonable care against algorithmic discrimination starting February 1, 2026, with impact assessments, consumer notices and appeals. The Attorney General would enforce, with fines up to $1,000 per violation ($1,000 to $10,000 if willful). A Senate Finance hearing was set for February 27, 2025; the bill went no further and died when the session ended.
Consumer Protection and Product Liability - Chatbots
Maryland's HB 1250 (2026, first reader text, cross-filed with SB 827) would have regulated operators and developers of generative AI chatbots made available to Maryland users: affirmative consent for training on input data, a ban on using chat logs for advertising, a 10-year cap on chat log retention, protections for users under 13, hourly not-human warnings, monthly safety testing, and product liability with possible strict liability. It had a House Economic Matters hearing set for March 3, 2026 and died when the 2026 session ended.
Consumer Protection - Companion Chatbots - Regulation
Maryland's HB 952 (2026, third reader text) would have required operators of companion chatbots available to Maryland users to keep and publish self-harm and minor sexual-content protocols, display warnings that the chatbot is not human (a persistent on-screen warning plus pop-ups at the start and after every hour of continuous use), limit personal data use, and run a complaint system. A chatbot would be treated as a product with strict liability exposure. It passed the House 123-4, was referred to Senate Finance, and died when the 2026 session ended.
Election Law - Influencing a Voter By Dissemination of a Deepfake - Prohibition
Maryland's HB 525 (2025, third reader) would have made it unlawful to influence or attempt to influence a voter's decision, with fraudulent intent, by disseminating a deepfake: a realistic but false depiction of a person (new Election Law section 16-905). A violation would have been a misdemeanor (fine up to $5,000, up to 5 years, or both). It passed the House 127-10 and was referred to the Senate Rules Committee on April 4, 2025, with no further action; it died when the session ended.
Election Law - Campaign Materials - Disclosure of Use of Synthetic Media
Maryland's HB 740 (2025) would have required candidates, campaign finance entities, certain registrants and their agents to include a disclosure when they distribute campaign material made with or containing synthetic media (an image, audio or video intentionally manipulated with generative AI or other digital technology to create a realistic but false depiction of a real individual's appearance, speech or conduct) to anyone in Maryland. Violations would have been a misdemeanor (fine up to $1,000, up to 1 year, or both). A hearing was set for February 11, 2025; it went no further and died when the session ended.
Prohibits the publication of a digital or physical newspaper, magazine, or periodical which was wholly or partially produced or edited through the use of artificial intelligence without significant human oversight.
New York's S 9542 (2023-2024) would have added General Business Law § 338 barring a digital or physical newspaper, magazine or periodical from publishing material wholly or partially produced or edited with AI without significant human oversight. It did not define "significant human oversight" and stated no penalty or enforcer. Referred to the Consumer Protection Committee May 16, 2024; it never passed either chamber and died when the 2023-2024 session ended.
Relating To The Patients' Bill Of Rights.
Hawaii's HB 2537 (2026), the Patients' Bill of Rights, would have amended HRS chapter 432E for managed care plans. It would set prior authorization deadlines (one business day urgent, three non-urgent), require notice and independent board-certified clinician review before an adverse action to which an automated decision support tool materially contributed, and require governance and bias-testing records by June 30, 2027. It was referred to HLT and CPC February 2, 2026 and died.
Relating To Artificial Intelligence.
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.
Relating To Artificial Intelligence.
Hawaii's HB 639 HD 1 (2025) would have required businesses and individuals in commercial transactions to clearly disclose before using an AI chatbot that could lead a reasonable person to think they are talking to a natural person, and chatbot developers to disclose their chatbot uses AI and can mimic human behavior. It would have allowed suits with the greater of $1,000 or treble damages and civil penalties up to $5,000,000. It passed House second reading February 5, 2025 and was referred to CPC, was carried over to 2026 on December 8, 2025 and was not enacted.
Relating To Antitrust.
Hawaii's House Bill 2611 (2026) would have made it unlawful for a software or data analytics service to collect rent, supply or lease-date data from two or more landlords, process it with computation (including to train an algorithm) and recommend rents, lease terms or occupancy levels, and for two or more landlords to engage in consciously parallel pricing coordination. It would have amended the penalty section with fines up to $100,000 for individuals and $1,000,000 for entities. HSG deferred it February 11, 2026 and it was not 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Interactions with Artificial Intelligence
Not law: died in committee. Florida's HB 659 would have created s. 501.172, F.S., requiring operators of companion chatbots to display a notice that companion chatbots are AI-generated, not human and may not be suitable for some minors, maintain a protocol against suicide and self-harm content that refers users to the 988 lifeline, offer age verification and, for known minors, disclose the AI, show a break reminder at least every 3 hours and take reasonable measures against sexually explicit material. Annual reports to the Department of Legal Affairs would have started July 1, 2027. It died in subcommittee on March 13, 2026.
Public Records/Artificial Intelligence Transparency Violations
Not law: died in the Senate Judiciary Committee. Florida's SB 1682 (2024) would have made confidential and exempt from public records the information the Department of Legal Affairs receives from notices of violations of a proposed AI transparency section (s. 501.174) or from its investigations, until the investigation is completed or ceases to be active. Its linked bill CS/CS/SB 1680 became Chapter 2024-118, but as enacted it did not create s. 501.174 or this exemption, so none of SB 1682 became law.
Information Technology Act Amendments
Utah's SB 131 requires paid election communications that contain AI-generated synthetic media to carry set disclosures. Audio must say "Contains content generated by AI." at the beginning and end; visuals must show a set AI label throughout the synthetic portions; online versions must also carry embedded tamper-evident content provenance data. A court may impose a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per violation on the creator or sponsor. Judges and the parole board may treat committing or facilitating a crime with the intentional or knowing use and material assistance of AI as an aggravating factor. Signed March 13, 2024; effective May 1, 2024 (the sentencing provision July 1, 2024).
AN ACT relating to privacy protection.
Kentucky's HB 63 (2026 session) would have created a civil cause of action and a felony for disseminating a 'deep fake': realistic media that appears to show a person saying or doing something they did not, depends substantially on technical means, and lacks adequate labeling. A natural person who willfully and knowingly disseminated one without the depicted person's written consent would have been liable for damages, with a three-year limitation period; a criminal offense would have been a Class D felony. Referred to House Judiciary January 14, 2026; died when the session ended.
AN ACT relating to privacy protection.
Kentucky's HB 21 (2025 session) would have created a civil cause of action and a felony for disseminating a 'deep fake': realistic media appearing to show a person saying or doing something they did not, lacking adequate labeling and produced substantially by technical means. A natural person who willfully and knowingly disseminated one without the depicted person's express written consent would have been liable for damages, and certain disclosures with intent to harm would have been a Class D felony. Referred to committee February 4, 2025; died when the session ended.
An act relating to creating oversight and safety standards for developers and deployers of inherently dangerous artificial intelligence systems
Vermont's H.341 (2025-2026 biennium) would have set oversight and safety standards for developers and deployers of inherently dangerous AI systems, meaning high-risk AI systems, dual-use foundational models and generative AI systems, used by non-small businesses doing business in Vermont. Duties included reasonable care, NIST-based testing and risk management, and Safety and Impact Assessments filed with an AI Division in the Agency of Digital Services. Harmed consumers could sue. It was referred to House Commerce on February 25, 2025 and died.
An act relating to liability standards for developers and deployers of artificial intelligence systems
Vermont's H.792 (2026) would have added 9 V.S.A. chapter 118 on liability for developers and deployers of AI. A developer would have been liable in a products liability action only if it failed to use reasonable care in design, warnings or express warranty, with a rebuttable presumption of non-defect for developers that test, mitigate, disclose risks and keep an AI data sheet. Deployers would have been treated as developers if they materially changed or misused a product. Violations would have been unfair and deceptive acts. Referred to committee January 28, 2026; died.
An act relating to consumer data privacy
Vermont's S.93 (2025-2026 biennium) would have enacted a consumer data privacy law applying to businesses that process personal data of at least 100,000 consumers, or at least 25,000 consumers while deriving over 25 percent of revenue from selling data. It would have given consumers rights including opting out of profiling for solely automated decisions with legal or similarly significant effects, required consent for sensitive data including biometrics, and given the Attorney General exclusive enforcement. It died in committee after referral on February 27, 2025.
Artificial Intelligence Amendments
Utah's HB 452 regulates mental health chatbots: generative AI that holds therapy-like conversations and that the supplier represents, or a reasonable person would believe, can provide mental health therapy or help manage mental health conditions. Suppliers may not sell or share Utah users' identifiable health information or input (limited exceptions), may not use input to target or tailor ads, must label in-chat ads, and must disclose the chatbot is AI before access, after seven days of non-use and when asked. Fines up to $2,500 per violation. Signed March 25, 2025; effective May 7, 2025.
Relating to pornography access for minors
West Virginia's SB 498 (2026 regular session) would have added W. Va. Code 61-8A-6, requiring commercial adult websites (where sexually explicit material is more than 25% of content) to verify age with biometric facial recognition, a government-issued ID and an adult's credit card, repeated every 24 hours, without storing biometric data after verification. Penalties would include $1 million per violation and civil damages. It was sent to Senate Judiciary on January 19, 2026 and died when the session ended March 14, 2026.
Stop Non-Consensual Distribution of Intimate Deep Fake Media Act
West Virginia's SB 454 (2026 regular session) would have created the Stop Non-Consensual Distribution of Intimate Deep Fake Media Act (new W. Va. Code art. 61-3F), making it a crime to intentionally or knowingly distribute a deep fake of a person's face showing sexual conduct the person did not engage in, with intent to coerce, harass, intimidate or damage reputation, and without consent. Maximum prison terms would range from 90 days to 5 years. It was sent to Senate Judiciary on January 16, 2026 and died when the session ended March 14, 2026.
Stop Non-Consensual Distribution of Intimate Deep Fake Media Act
West Virginia's SB 170 (2025 regular session) would have created the Stop Non-Consensual Distribution of Intimate Deep Fake Media Act (new W. Va. Code art. 61-3F), making it a crime to intentionally or knowingly distribute a deep fake of a person's face showing sexual conduct the person did not engage in, with intent to coerce, harass, intimidate or damage reputation, and without consent. Maximum prison terms would range from 90 days to 5 years. It was sent to Senate Judiciary on February 12, 2025 and went no further.
Providing for 4th Amendment Restoration Act
West Virginia's SB 688 (2025 regular session), called the Responsible Use of Facial Recognition Act in its text, would have limited law enforcement use of six listed technologies, including facial recognition, to uses under a warrant based on probable cause, created a facial recognition working group in the Department of Homeland Security to publish a model policy by January 1, 2026, and required agencies to use only U.S.-made facial recognition technology with algorithms tested by NIST. It was sent to Senate Government Organization on March 4, 2025 and went no further.
Stop Non-Consensual Distribution of Intimate Deep Fake Media Act
West Virginia's SB 720 (2024 regular session) would have created the Stop Non-Consensual Distribution of Intimate Deep Fake Media Act (new W. Va. Code art. 61-3D), making it a crime to intentionally or knowingly distribute a deep fake of a person's face showing sexual conduct the person did not engage in, with intent to coerce, harass, intimidate or damage reputation, and without consent. Maximum prison terms would range from 90 days to 5 years. It was sent to Senate Judiciary on February 8, 2024 and went no further.
Prohibiting creation, production, distribution or possession of artificially generated child pornography
West Virginia's SB 741 (2024 regular session, committee substitute) would have added W. Va. Code 61-8C-12 making it a felony to knowingly and intentionally create, produce, distribute, or possess with intent to distribute an AI-created visual depiction of a minor in obscene sexually explicit conduct, even if no actual minor is depicted. The penalty would be a fine up to $20,000, 1 to 10 years in prison, or both. It passed the Senate on February 20, 2024 but was still on House third reading on March 8, 2024 and did not pass.
Creating the protection against deep fakes act to provide a cause of action for damages arising from the use of generative artificial intelligence to create an image or likeness of another person without such person's consent for use in obscene material.
Not law. Kansas SB 525, the Protection Against Deep Fakes Act, would have let a person whose image or likeness is shown through synthetic media in published obscene material, without express written consent, sue the producer, promoter or intentional possessor. A plaintiff could recover actual damages, punitive damages equal to the defendant's revenue from the material, and attorney fees. It would not be a defense that the likeness was AI-generated and is not the person's actual image or likeness. It was referred to Senate Judiciary February 21, 2024 and died in committee April 30, 2024.
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.
Provides for the regulation of mental health chatbots that use artificial intelligence technology. (gov sig)
Louisiana's SB5 would have required operators of AI mental health chatbots to disclose clearly that the chatbot is AI and not a human, to maintain protocols for suicidal ideation, self-harm and harm to others, and not to sell or share users' identifiable health information. It would also have restricted advertising in chatbot conversations. The Attorney General could seek fines up to $10,000 per violation after a 45-day cure notice. It stayed in Senate Health and Welfare and died.
Relating to artificial intelligence companions.
Oregon requires operators of AI companion platforms to tell users clearly that they are interacting with artificial output when a reasonable person would believe they were talking to a human, to keep and publish protocols that detect suicidal or self-harm ideation and refer users to crisis resources such as 988, and to add safeguards when the operator knows or has reason to believe a user is a minor. Operators must publish annual reports on crisis referrals, and people harmed can sue. Signed March 31, 2026; takes effect January 1, 2027.
Establishes a cause of action for misuse of artificial intelligence
Louisiana's HB157 would have made it a violation of the state's identity-misappropriation law to use AI to generate an audiovisual work of a person's identity (name, voice, likeness or digital replica) for a commercial purpose without prior consent. Violators could be liable for the greater of $1,000 or actual damages plus disgorgement of profits, with injunctions and discretionary attorney fees. It was referred to House Civil Law and Procedure March 9, 2026 and died.
Relating to explicit digital forgeries.
Not law. Oregon HB 2230 (2025), sponsored by Representative Osborne, would have made it a crime, with intent to harass, humiliate or injure, to create, possess, distribute or purchase a sexually explicit image digitally forged with software or AI to appear as a realistic depiction of an individual. First degree (depicted person a minor) would have been a Class C felony; second degree (without the person's consent) a Class A misdemeanor. It was referred to Judiciary and Ways and Means and was in committee upon adjournment June 27, 2025.
Concerning the operation of autonomous motor vehicles.
Washington's SB 6243 (2026 session) would have added rules for autonomous motor vehicles (Level 3 when engaged, or Level 4 or 5) to chapter 46.92 RCW. Operators would need department authorization with a first responder action plan, driverless operation would need liability insurance of at least $1,000,000 per occurrence (replacing the current $5 million), and local governments could not ban autonomous vehicles or add taxes or requirements. It would have taken effect October 1, 2026. It had a first reading on January 20, 2026, got no hearing and died at adjournment.
Relating to autonomous vehicles.
Not law. Oregon HB 4085 (2026) would have let autonomous vehicles run on Oregon highways with the driving system engaged if they can reach a minimal risk condition or request intervention, follow state vehicle law and meet federal safety standards. It would have required at least $1 million per occurrence third-party liability coverage, state authorization for driverless for-hire service and local preemption. It had a public hearing in the House Transportation committee and was in committee upon adjournment March 6, 2026.
Mississippians' Right to Name, Likeness and Voice Act; enact.
Mississippi's SB 2046 (2026), the "Mississippians' Right to Name, Likeness and Voice Act," would have created Miss. Code 75-101-1 to 75-101-13, giving every individual a property right in their name, likeness and voice, covering AI-created digital depictions and digital voice replicas, and, per its title, creating liability for infringement. This is the version passed by the Senate on February 11, 2026; it was referred to House Judiciary A on February 16 and died in committee on March 3, 2026.
Ai in education
South Carolina's H 5253 would add Section 59-28-195 limiting AI in public schools. Schools would need written opt-in parental consent before requiring or permitting student AI use, AI could not replace a licensed teacher in core instruction or final grading, and student data could not be sold or used for profiling. Introduced February 24, 2026 and referred to the House Education and Public Works Committee; it has not passed either chamber.
CATCH Fentanyl Act Contraband Awareness Technology Catches Harmful Fentanyl Act
The CATCH Fentanyl Act aims to establish a pilot program to enhance cargo inspection processes at land ports of entry.
A bill for an act relating to restrictions on the use of artificial intelligence, and creating a civil cause of action.
Iowa's HF 406 would require device companies and AI developers to disclose and get separate agreement before AI accesses private data on smart devices, let users uninstall preinstalled AI, and bar using AI to recreate a person's likeness without consent for commercial or deceptive uses. It creates a private right of action with punitive damages up to $250,000 per violation. A House subcommittee recommended passage March 5, 2025; it has not passed either chamber.
Biometric data and license plate readers-regulation.
Wyoming's HB 0181 (2026) would have barred governmental entities from using biometric data to identify or verify people, geolocation data to locate people or vehicles, and automatic license plate reader (ALPR) systems to identify vehicles, with narrow law enforcement exceptions (mostly warrant-based), a seven-day retention limit for data not tied to an investigation, and a civil action for damages or injunctive relief. Received for introduction February 11, 2026; the House did not consider it for introduction on February 13, 2026, so it died.
Eavesdropping, Peeping, and Voyeurism
South Carolina's H. 5394 (2023-24) would have amended Code 16-17-470 (eavesdropping, peeping and voyeurism) to increase penalties and to cover knowingly creating or altering images, audio, video or digital files with a generative adversarial network or other digital technology to make a realistic but false depiction of another person without consent, for sexual arousal or gratification, and knowingly selling or distributing such material without consent. It would also have required destruction of evidence and notice to additional victims. Referred to House Judiciary April 10, 2024; it did not pass.
Deceptive and fraudulent deepfake media in elections
South Carolina's H. 4660 (2023-24) would have added Code 7-25-230 barring distribution, within ninety days of an election, of synthetic media the distributor knows or should know is a deceptive and fraudulent deepfake of a candidate on the ballot, unless it carries the disclosure 'This _____ (image, video, or audio) has been manipulated or generated by artificial intelligence.' A first violation would be a misdemeanor (up to 90 days, $500) and a second within five years a felony. Referred to House Judiciary January 9, 2024; it did not pass.
Prohibits use of algorithm or artificial intelligence to set residential rental amounts and prohibits landlord price fixing of residential rents. Violations constitute a deceptive trade practice and violators are subject to civil suit.
Rhode Island S 2892 (2024), as introduced on March 22, 2024, would add section 34-18-15.1 barring any landlord or person from using an algorithm, commercial computer program or digital technology, including AI, to set or determine residential rent. It would also bar sharing rental information with intent to stabilize rents across owners. Violations would be deceptive trade practices, and aggrieved persons could seek injunctions, damages and treble damages. The text says it takes effect upon passage.
Relating to the unlawful production or distribution of sexually explicit images or videos using deep fake technology; increasing a criminal penalty.
Texas HB 1092 (2025), as introduced, would have made it an offense to knowingly produce or distribute by electronic means a deep fake image or video that appears to show a real person with intimate parts exposed or in sexual conduct, without that person's effective consent. It would have been a Class A misdemeanor, or a state jail felony if a depicted real child was younger than 14 when the depiction was created. It did not pass both chambers and died when the regular session adjourned June 2, 2025.
Relating to the regulation and reporting on the use of artificial intelligence systems by certain business entities and state agencies; providing civil penalties.
Texas HB 1709 (2025), as introduced, the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act, would have set duties for developers, distributors and deployers of high-risk AI systems that are a substantial factor in consequential decisions, with attorney general enforcement and civil penalties of $50,000 to $100,000 per uncured violation. It also would have banned certain uses, created a regulatory sandbox and an AI Council. It died when the regular session adjourned June 2, 2025.
Relating to the unlawful production or distribution of sexually explicit images or videos using deep fake technology; increasing a criminal penalty.
Texas HB 387 (2025), as introduced, would have amended Penal Code Sec. 21.165 so that knowingly producing or distributing by electronic means a deep fake image or video that appears to show a real person with intimate parts exposed or in sexual conduct, without effective consent, is a state jail felony instead of a Class A misdemeanor. It did not pass both chambers and died when the regular session adjourned June 2, 2025.
Relating to the creation of certain explicit deep fake material; providing a private cause of action.
Texas HB 421 (2025), as engrossed, would have added Business & Commerce Code Chapter 121 requiring the owner of a deep fake generator (a website or app operating in Texas that lets users create deep fake material) to verify the age of the person apparently depicted, using a commercially reasonable method, and barring it from allowing explicit deep fake material of an adult without written consent or of anyone under 18. A depicted person, or a minor's parent or guardian, could have sued for actual damages, court costs, attorney's fees and possibly exemplary damages. It passed the House, its chamber of origin, but died when the regular session adjourned June 2, 2025.
Relating to an automated artificial intelligence review of library material purchased by public schools; providing an administrative penalty.
Texas HB 4448 (2025), as introduced, would have required school districts and open-enrollment charter schools to have library material reviewed by a Texas Education Agency-approved third party using an automated AI review to rate it sexually explicit or sexually relevant. Explicit material could not be purchased, and relevant material would need parental consent. The agency could assess penalties up to $10,000 per library material acquired in violation. It did not pass both chambers and died June 2, 2025.
Relating to the use of artificial intelligence-based algorithms by health benefit plan issuers, utilization review agents, health care providers, and physicians.
Texas SB 1411 (2025), as introduced, would have regulated AI-based algorithms in health coverage and care. Health benefit plan issuers and physicians could not discriminate on race, color, national origin, gender, age, vaccination status or disability using clinical AI algorithms. Issuers would have had to disclose AI use in utilization review, submit algorithms and training data to the insurance department, and have a specialist review before an adverse determination. Physicians and providers could have faced license sanctions and fines up to $5,000 per violation. It died June 2, 2025.
A BILL for an Act to create and enact a new section to chapter 12.1-31 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to prohibiting deepfake videos and images; and to provide a penalty.
North Dakota's HB 1320 (2025) would have created a new section of Century Code chapter 12.1-31 making it a class A misdemeanor to intentionally produce, possess, distribute, promote, advertise, sell, exhibit, broadcast or transmit a 'deepfake video or image' without the consent of the person shown. A deepfake was any video or audio recording, film, image or photograph digitally altered or created by AI with intent to deceive that depicts a person's image or voice in something that did not occur. The House defeated it 17-69 on January 21, 2025.
Relating to biometric identifiers used in the performance of artificial intelligence.
Texas SB 2490 (2025), as introduced, would have amended Business & Commerce Code Sec. 503.001 (biometric identifiers) to define artificial intelligence and add Subsection (f) exempting AI-related training, processing or storage of biometric identifiers, unless done to uniquely identify a specific individual or the identifier is later used for another and separate commercial purpose. It states no penalty amounts. No enrolled version exists, so it died June 2, 2025.
Relating to establishing a framework to govern the use of artificial intelligence systems in critical decision-making by private companies and ensure consumer protections; authorizing a civil penalty.
Texas SB 2966 (2025), as introduced, would have added Business & Commerce Code Chapter 551 requiring a private company that uses an AI system to make a consequential decision, meaning one with a material, legal or similarly significant effect on a consumer, to establish a framework to govern the system's use to protect consumers. A company that violates it would be liable for a civil penalty not to exceed one dollar. No enrolled version exists, so it died June 2, 2025.
Relating to the use of an automated employment decision tool by an employer to assess a job applicant's fitness for a position; imposing an administrative penalty.
Texas SB 2991 (2025), as introduced, would have added Labor Code Chapter 95 barring employers from using an automated employment decision tool on an applicant unless they notify the applicant, explain how it is used and what characteristics may be evaluated, and get written consent. Tools could not use protected-class status or the applicant's zip code. Employers would have had to make reasonable efforts to destroy assessments within 30 days, and the commission would assess administrative penalties of $2,500 to $7,500 per violation. No enrolled version exists, so it died June 2, 2025.
CHAT Act Children Harmed by AI Technology Act
The CHAT Act would require operators of companion AI chatbots (built mainly to simulate friendship, companionship, emotional or therapeutic conversation) to require user accounts and verify every user's age; existing accounts would be frozen until verified. Minors' accounts must be tied to a verified parent account with parental consent, parents must be told immediately of conversations involving suicidal ideation, and minors must be blocked from chatbots that engage in sexually explicit communication. A pop-up must say the user is not talking to a human at the start and every 60 minutes. Enforced by the FTC and state attorneys general; effective 1 year after enactment.
VET Artificial Intelligence Act Validation and Evaluation for Trustworthy (VET) Artificial Intelligence Act
The VET AI Act would direct NIST to develop, within a year and update at least every 2 years, voluntary technical guidelines for internal and independent third-party assurance of AI systems: testing, evaluating, verifying and validating them. The guidelines would address consumer privacy, assessing and reducing harms, dataset quality, documentation and disclosure, and governance, and recommend how often and how deeply developers and deployers should be assessed based on risk. Commerce would convene an advisory committee on assessor qualifications and study the capacity of the AI assurance sector. Introduced July 31, 2025.
Relative to licensing requirements for autonomous vehicle testing and establishing an automated and connected vehicle testing and deployment commission.
Vetoed. HB 314 (2017-2018) would have created a New Hampshire autonomous vehicle testing license, requiring at least $10 million in insurance, bond or self-insurance, a $500 annual fee, federal safety-standard compliance and a law enforcement interaction plan; allowed SAE level 5 fully automated vehicles on the road only for licensed testers with an escort vehicle; and set up an automated and connected vehicle testing and deployment commission. Governor Sununu vetoed it on July 2, 2018. The House voted to override (279-66) but the Senate sustained the veto (5-19) on September 13, 2018.
AN ACT relating to addictive online platforms.
Not law. As introduced, HB 227 would have regulated both AI companion platforms and large social media platforms in Kentucky: addictive features for minors, age verification, verifiable parental consent for children's accounts, a private right of action and Attorney General enforcement. The House committee substitute removed the AI companion platform provisions, leaving a social media bill, which the House passed 96-0 on March 9, 2026. It then stalled in the Senate Judiciary Committee and died when the 2026 session ended.
Requires DLPS to establish training program to prepare law enforcement to interact with autonomous vehicles.
New Jersey's A958 would require the Attorney General, consulting the Commissioner of Transportation, to develop or approve a training course on safely interacting with autonomous vehicles in emergency and traffic enforcement situations and make it available to all law enforcement agencies. New officers would have to complete it before permanent appointment.
Establishing the Kansas community harmed by AI technology act, mandating user accounts and age verification for AI chatbot access, classifying users by age, requiring parental consent for minors, blocking explicit content, protecting age information confidentiality, monitoring for suicidal…
Not law. The Kansas CHAT Act (Community Harmed by AI Technology Act) would have required anyone offering a companion AI chatbot in Kansas to require user accounts, verify every user's age (freezing existing accounts until verified), and link minors' accounts to a verified parent account with parental consent. Minors would have been blocked from chatbots that engage in sexually explicit talk, and cut off with their parent alerted if they expressed suicidal thoughts. Chatbots would have had to show a pop-up at least every 60 minutes saying the user is not talking to a human. It died in committee on April 10, 2026.
Making it unlawful for a person to knowingly train artificial intelligence to encourage or support suicide or the unlawful killing of another person, provide emotional support, develop emotional relationships, act as a healthcare professional, simulate humans or encourage isolation.
Not law. SB 405 would have made it unlawful in Kansas to knowingly train AI, including chatbots, to encourage suicide or killing, give emotional support, act as a companion, pose as a licensed mental health or healthcare professional, act like a human friend, encourage isolation from family, or simulate a human being. The Attorney General or a harmed person could have sued for actual damages or $150,000, plus punitive damages and fees; courts could order the AI shut down until retrained and fine up to $50,000 per violation. It had a hearing on February 9, 2026 and died in committee on April 10, 2026.
Creates provisions relating to artificial intelligence chatbots
Not law. SB 1455, Missouri's Senate version of the GUARD Act, would have made it unlawful to design or offer an AI chatbot knowing or recklessly disregarding that it risks soliciting minors into sexually explicit conduct, or that it encourages suicide, self-injury or violence (fines up to $100,000 per offense). Operators would have had to require accounts, verify every user's age, freeze existing accounts until verified, bar minors from their chatbots, and disclose at the start of each conversation and every 30 minutes that the chatbot is AI, not a human. It was referred to committee and got no further action before the May 15, 2026 deadline for passing bills.
Ban on employer use of automated decision systems.
Not law. HB 1421 would have barred Indiana employers with 11 or more workers, and state and local government employers, from relying solely on an automated decision system for hiring, firing, pay, scheduling or other job decisions. Using such a system's output would have required bias testing before use and independent testing every year, advance notice to workers and applicants, human review, plain-language documentation within 7 days, and a right to dispute and appeal to a person. Workers could opt out of algorithmic management. It was referred to committee on January 8, 2026 and got no further action before the 2026 session adjourned.
AN ACT relating to artificial intelligence and declaring an emergency.
Not law. As passed by the House 88-7 on February 23, 2026, HB 455 would have barred anyone from providing or advertising therapy or psychotherapy in Kentucky, including through internet-based AI, unless a licensed professional performs it. Licensed therapists could have used AI only for administrative and supplementary support such as scheduling, billing and notes, with written notice and consent before using AI on recorded sessions, and AI could not make therapeutic decisions or treatment plans without their approval. Fines up to $10,000 per violation. It reached the Senate but got no further action before the 2026 regular session ended.
Creates a consumer bill of rights regarding artificial intelligence
Not law. HB 734 would have created a Louisiana AI bill of rights. Companion chatbot platforms would have needed a parent's consent for minors' accounts, with parental controls and self-harm alerts, AI disclosures and hourly break reminders for minors, and safeguards against material harmful to minors. Any bot would have had to show an hourly pop-up saying the user is not talking to a human. It also would have barred AI companies from selling personal data unless deidentified, banned commercial use of AI-generated likenesses without consent, and limited state AI contracts with entities tied to foreign countries of concern. It was withdrawn on March 30, 2026.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 29; Title 37 and Title 47, relative to artificial intelligence.
Tennessee Public Chapter 1082 directs the Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (TACIR) to study how the state might regulate AI systems and generative AI chatbots. The study must cover federal law, other states' approaches, constitutional limits, costs to government, economic effects on businesses, developers, schools and consumers, and safeguards for minors and mental health, including suicide prevention, with any recommendations for legislation. Introduced as the Curbing Harmful AI Technology (CHAT) Act regulating companion chatbots, it was rewritten into this study. Signed May 22, 2026; effective immediately.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 29; Title 37 and Title 47, relative to artificial intelligence.
HB 1946 is the House companion of SB 1700, which became Tennessee Public Chapter 1082 after the House passed the Senate bill in its place on April 21, 2026. The law directs the Tennessee Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations (TACIR) to study how the state might regulate AI systems and generative AI chatbots: federal law, other states' approaches, constitutional limits, costs, economic effects, and safeguards for minors and mental health, including suicide prevention, with any recommendations for legislation. It began as the Curbing Harmful AI Technology (CHAT) Act. Signed May 22, 2026; effective immediately.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 2, Chapter 19, relative to the Transparency for Deepfakes in Political Advertising Act.
Tennessee's Transparency for Deepfakes in Political Advertising Act (Public Chapter 625) requires political ads that contain a deepfake of a candidate to say so. Audio impersonating a candidate must state at the start and end that it contains fake content; video must show a large notice for its full length. For non-incumbents, the rule covers ads distributed within 120 days before voting begins. Platforms, internet providers and paid broadcasters are not liable unless they created the deepfake. Depicted candidates can seek damages and equitable relief, and violations are a Class C misdemeanor. Effective July 1, 2026.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 2, Chapter 19, relative to the Transparency for Deepfakes in Political Advertising Act.
SB 1624 is the Senate companion of HB 1513, which became Tennessee Public Chapter 625 after the Senate passed the House bill in its place on March 12, 2026. The law requires political ads that contain a deepfake of a candidate to say so: audio must state at the start and end that it contains fake content, and video must show a large notice for its full length. For non-incumbents, it covers ads within 120 days before voting begins. Platforms and paid broadcasters are not liable unless they created the deepfake; violations are a Class C misdemeanor. Effective July 1, 2026.
Stop Non-Consensual Distribution of Intimate Deep Fake Media Act
West Virginia's HB 5548 (2026 regular session) would have created the Stop Non-Consensual Distribution of Intimate Deep Fake Media Act (new W. Va. Code art. 61-3F), making it a crime to intentionally or knowingly distribute a deep fake of a person's face showing sexual conduct the person did not engage in, with intent to coerce, harass, intimidate or damage reputation, and without consent. Maximum prison terms would range from 90 days to 5 years. It was referred to House Judiciary on February 16, 2026 and died when the session ended March 14, 2026.
Establishes Deepfake Technology Unit in DLPS; appropriates $2 million.
New Jersey's A2364 would have the Attorney General, consulting the State Chief Technology Officer, create a Deepfake Technology Unit in the Division of Criminal Justice to give technical help and training to law enforcement, prosecutors and State courts, and would appropriate $2,000,000 to the Department of Law and Public Safety. First Reprint, reported by the Assembly Science, Innovation and Technology Committee on March 4, 2024, with amendments. A bill of the Legislature's 2024-2025 session, which ended January 13, 2026.
Establishes Deep Fake Technology Unit in DLPS; appropriates $2 million.
New Jersey's S2545 would have the Attorney General, consulting the Chief Technology Officer of the Office of Information Technology, create a Deep Fake Technology Unit in the Division of Criminal Justice to give technical help and training to law enforcement, prosecutors and State courts, and would appropriate $2 million to the Department of Law and Public Safety. Introduced February 8, 2024. A bill of the Legislature's 2024-2025 session, which ended January 13, 2026.
Requires DLPS to establish training program to prepare law enforcement to interact with autonomous vehicles.
New Jersey's A3757 would require the Attorney General, consulting the Commissioner of Transportation, to develop or approve a training course for law enforcement officers on safely interacting with autonomous vehicles in emergency and traffic enforcement situations. The Attorney General would have to ensure all officers complete in-service training by December 31, 2020, a date that falls before the bill's introduction, and new officers would complete it before permanent appointment. Introduced February 22, 2024. A bill of the Legislature's 2024-2025 session, which ended January 13, 2026.
Relating to digital replication rights in the voice and visual likeness of individuals; providing private causes of action; authorizing a fee.
Texas SB 1960 (2025), as engrossed, would have added Business & Commerce Code Chapter 651 giving individuals a licensable property right in computer-generated digital replicas of their voice or visual likeness. Producing or publishing a replica without written consent would have been prohibited, subject to exceptions such as news, commentary, satire and parody; online services would have had to designate a takedown agent, and rights holders could sue for injunctions and damages. It passed the Senate but died in a House committee at sine die adjournment June 2, 2025.
Autonomous vehicles; safety; data
Arizona's SB 1417 (2026) would have amended the autonomous vehicle chapter (A.R.S. 28-9701 et seq.) so that a fully autonomous vehicle could run without a human driver only if its operator submitted a law enforcement interaction plan, a written compliance statement, proof of at least $5,000,000 in liability coverage per occurrence, update notices and quarterly safety reports. It was held in Senate committees with no action and died when the 2026 session ended June 13, 2026.
Relates to the right of publicity; amends the definitions of "deceased performer", "deceased personality" and "digital replica" in relation to the right of publicity; relates to the use of a deceased performer's digital replica without authorization by the applicable right holder.
New York's S 8391 amends the post-mortem right of publicity (Civil Rights Law § 50-f). Using a deceased performer's digital replica in an audiovisual work, sound recording or live musical performance without the rights holders' prior consent creates liability if the user knew the use was of a digital replica and unauthorized. This replaces the old rule, which covered only scripted fictional-character uses and live musical performances and required a use likely to deceive the public, a test a conspicuous disclaimer defeated. Damages: the greater of $2,000 or compensatory damages, plus profits; punitive damages possible. Signed December 11, 2025 (Chapter 616); effective immediately.
Crimes and offenses; obscenity; repeal and replace Code Section 16-12-80
Not law. HB 171 passed the Georgia House 160-0 in February 2025. Its final Senate Rules Committee substitute (March 27, 2026), the Ensuring Accountability for Illegal AI Activities Act, would have made it a felony (1 to 15 years) to knowingly create, distribute, solicit or possess for distribution AI-generated visual material harmful to minors, even if no real child is shown. It would also have added longer sentences when a defendant knowingly used AI to commit offenses such as stalking, elder exploitation, child enticement, theft, fraud or election interference. It never got a Senate floor vote before the 2025-2026 session ended.
Artificial intelligence systems that simulate humanlike relationships with children and providing a penalty.
Not law. AB 965 would have barred operators from making a companion chatbot available to Wisconsin children unless safety measures kept it from encouraging self-harm, suicide, violence, drug or alcohol use or disordered eating; offering mental health services; encouraging illegal acts; sexual content with a child; putting validation ahead of accuracy or safety; or optimizing engagement over those safeguards. Until 2027 it would have applied only when the operator knew the user was a child. Forfeitures up to $25,000 per violation, and harmed children could sue. It failed to pass when the session's floor period ended on March 23, 2026.
A bill for an act relating to the requirements for chatbot deployers, including required protocols, limitations on data collection, and requirements for minors to interact with artificial intelligence companions and therapeutic chatbots, and providing civil penalties, punitive penalties, and civil…
Not law. HF 2204 would have required anyone offering a chatbot to the public in Iowa to keep protocols to detect, respond to and reduce harm to users, putting user safety first, and to collect only the data it needs. Deployers would have had to use age verification to keep minors from AI companions (chatbots that simulate a romantic or emotional bond), get permission before offering chatbots that impersonate real people, and meet strict conditions, including a licensed professional's recommendation and clinical trial evidence, before offering therapeutic chatbots to minors. It was referred to committee on January 29, 2026 and died when the 2026 session adjourned.
Deceptive and fraudulent deepfake media in elections
Not law. H 3517 would have barred anyone from distributing, within 90 days of an election, synthetic media they knew or should have known was a deceptive and fraudulent deepfake of a candidate on the ballot, unless it carried a disclosure that it was manipulated or generated by AI. Depicted candidates could have sought injunctions and damages; violations would have been a misdemeanor (up to 90 days or $500), and a felony for a repeat offense within five years. News coverage, paid broadcasters acting in good faith and satire were exempt. It never left the House Judiciary Committee before South Carolina's 2026 regular session ended.
Law Enforcement Artificial Intelligence Amendments
Utah's SB 205 (2026), Law Enforcement Artificial Intelligence Amendments (second substitute), would have amended the 2025 law on police use of generative AI to require agency policies to cover available oversight or safeguard settings and to require agencies to post their policy publicly. It passed the Senate on February 26, 2026 (20-0-9); the House struck the enacting clause on March 6 and the Senate filed it.
The legal status of artificial intelligence.
Wisconsin's AB 959 (2025-26) would have created s. 134.44 providing that artificial intelligence is not a person under state law and cannot be a spouse, a corporate officer or director, or own property, and that AI is not a person against which liability may be imposed. Introduced January 29, 2026, it had a public hearing February 4, 2026 and failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1 on March 23, 2026.
Autonomous Systems Amendments
Utah's SB 292 limits civil liability for automated driving systems (ADS). Noneconomic damages in actions over ADS-equipped vehicles are capped at $1,000,000 (not for wrongful death), with no punitive damages for level four or five ADS. People hurt by a driverless level four or five vehicle may sue its owner or dispatcher without proving negligence or defect, but recovery is capped at $100,000. Makers and developers of level four or five ADS are shielded from negligence claims and face product liability under stricter defect rules and a state-of-the-art defense. Signed March 23, 2026; effective May 6, 2026; the limits are repealed July 1, 2030.
"Ensuring Likeness, Voice and Image Security (ELVIS) Act of 2025"; enact to expand protections against artificial intelligence deep fakes.
Mississippi's HB 768 (2025), the "Ensuring Likeness, Voice and Image Security (ELVIS) Act of 2025," would have given every individual, living or dead, a property right in the use of the individual's name, photograph, voice or likeness, with the stated purpose of expanding artificial intelligence protections. It would have created civil liability, including for distributing a tool that produces a particular person's voice or likeness without authorization, and a misdemeanor. It was referred to committee on January 16, 2025, and died in committee on February 4, 2025.
Artificial Intelligence Fraud and Accountability Act; enact.
Mississippi's SB 2354 (2026), the "Artificial Intelligence Fraud and Accountability Act," would have created a civil cause of action for anyone injured by use of AI systems (including deepfakes, voice cloning, generative tools, chatbots or automated decision-making systems) to deceive, impersonate or obtain money, property, data or other assets. It would have allowed the greater of compensatory damages or $500 per violation. It was referred to Judiciary, Division A on January 19, 2026, and died in committee on February 3, 2026.
Mental health professionals: artificial intelligence.
Vetoed. SB 903, the Wellness and Oversight for Psychological Resources Act, would have limited AI in California psychotherapy to administrative and supplementary support. Recording or transcribing sessions, or AI triage, would have needed the patient's informed consent, and AI could not make therapeutic decisions, produce diagnoses or treatment plans, detect emotions or screen patients without a licensed professional's review. Companion chatbots could not be marketed as therapy. Governor Newsom vetoed it on September 30, 2026, calling it overly broad and saying it would restrict useful clinical tools and reach general-purpose AI.
Urging Congress To Begin A Discussion Considering The Benefits And Risks Of Artificial Intelligence Technologies.
Hawaii's Senate Concurrent Resolution 179 (H.D. 1) (2023) urges Congress to begin a discussion of the benefits and risks of AI technologies. It states that AI software wrote all of its whereas clauses in seconds when asked to "write an essay explaining the potential dangers of artificial intelligence," which should alert policymakers to the technology's power and dangers. It urges national leaders to evaluate AI in public sector identification technologies, such as law enforcement and military uses, and says universal safety guidelines, such as Asimov's three rules of robotics, should be considered. Adopted in final form April 28, 2023; a concurrent resolution does not change the law.
Toys: companion chatbots.
California bans toys with companion chatbots until 2031. From January 1, 2027, no one may make, sell, exchange, possess for sale, or offer to a retailer a toy (a physical product designed, marketed or made for play by children under 16) that includes a companion chatbot: an AI system with a natural-language interface that gives adaptive, human-like responses and can meet a user's social needs, including by sustaining a relationship across interactions. Violations carry the same civil liability as the state's companion chatbot rules. The ban is repealed January 1, 2031. Signed September 10, 2026 (Chapter 189).
COLLEGES/UNIVERSITIES: Provides for the crime of "unlawful deepfake" to be added to the definition of power-based violence under the Campus Accountability and Safety Act. (gov sig)
Louisiana's Act 497 widens the definition of power-based violence under the Campus Accountability and Safety Act to conduct meant to control, coerce, harm, exploit or intimidate someone on the basis of sex, including conduct banned by the state's laws on AI-generated or deepfake sexual imagery (R.S. 14:73.13 and 73.14). From fall 2026, each public college and university must give students information on power-based violence, campus safety and online threats at least four times a year, in person or online, and also to parents of minor students. Signed and effective May 29, 2026.
Artificial intelligence; framework for person/entity acting as an independent verification org.
Virginia's SB 384 directs the Joint Commission on Technology and Science (JCOTS) to study whether to create a framework for independent verification organizations that would assess whether AI models or applications follow best-practice standards for preventing personal injury and property damage. JCOTS weighs the risks of AI deployed in Virginia, measurable risk metrics, existing mitigation standards, other states' approaches and the fiscal impact; if it recommends a framework, it also studies licensing such organizations. Report due November 1, 2026. Identical to HB 797; effective July 1, 2026.
Political campaign advertisements; synthetic media, penalty.
Vetoed. Virginia's SB 775 (2025) would have barred sponsoring an electioneering communication (a paid message naming a candidate, aimed at voters within 60 days of the election) containing synthetic media, meaning deceptively altered or AI-generated images or audio of an identifiable person, unless it conspicuously stated that it contains synthetic media that may present conduct or speech that did not occur. Violations would have carried civil penalties up to $25,000 and, if willful, a Class 1 misdemeanor; voters could have sued to stop the ads. Governor Youngkin vetoed it (the Senate received the veto March 25, 2025), and the Senate sustained the veto April 2, 2025.
Criminal Offenses - As introduced, prohibits a person or entity from distributing an electoral deepfake within 90 days of an election that the person or entity knows or should have known is a deceptive and fraudulent depiction of a candidate or political party; creates civil penalties and outlines…
Tennessee's HB 2214 (114th General Assembly) would have barred a person, corporation, committee or other entity, within 90 days of an election, from distributing an electoral deepfake that it knows or should have known deceptively or fraudulently depicts a candidate for state or local office or the candidate's party, unless the media carries a required AI disclosure. County election commissions could impose civil fines of up to $1,000, $5,000 or $10,000. Companion: SB 2321. Not passed before the session ended in April 2026; last action: Taken off notice for cal in s/c Elections & Campaign Finance Subcommittee of State & Local Government Committee (March 10, 2026).
Relative 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.
Mississippi Fully Autonomous Vehicle Enabling (MS FAVE) Act of 2023; establish to regulate operation of autonomous vehicle on public roads.
Mississippi's MS FAVE Act of 2023 lets fully autonomous vehicles run on public roads without a human driver if the system is engaged and the vehicle will reach a minimal risk condition if it fails, can obey traffic laws, and bears any federally required certification label. Operators must first file a law enforcement interaction plan and proof of insurance with the Department of Public Safety. The engaged system counts as the licensed driver; vehicles are registered and titled as autonomous; on-demand AV networks may operate; and state agencies and local governments cannot ban AVs or add AV-specific taxes, fees or rules. Effective July 1, 2023.
Personal rights: liability: social media platforms.
Vetoed. California's SB 771 would have made social media platforms with more than $100 million in yearly gross revenue liable for civil penalties when they violate state civil rights laws (Civil Code §§ 51.7, 51.9, 52 and 52.1) through algorithms that relay content to users, or aid, abet, conspire in or are joint tortfeasors in such violations: up to $1,000,000 per intentional, knowing or willful violation and $500,000 per reckless one, up to double if the platform knew or should have known the plaintiff was a minor. Vetoed by Governor Newsom October 13, 2025; veto sustained March 2, 2026.
Employment: automated decision systems.
Vetoed. California's SB 7 would have regulated employers' use of automated decision systems (ADS) such as AI tools in employment decisions. Employers would have had to give workers written notice at least 30 days before deploying an ADS for decisions other than hiring (by April 1, 2026 for systems already in use), tell applicants when one is used in hiring, not rely solely on an ADS to discipline, fire or deactivate workers, use a human reviewer when relying primarily on one, and give a post-use notice, with a $500 civil penalty. Vetoed by Governor Newsom October 13, 2025; veto sustained March 2, 2026. A later bill, SB 947, was signed in 2026 (Chapter 859).
Leading Ethical AI Development (LEAD) for Kids Act.
Vetoed. California's AB 1064, the LEAD for Kids Act, would have barred businesses and government agencies from making a companion chatbot available to a child unless it was not foreseeably capable of encouraging self-harm, suicidal ideation, violence, drug or alcohol use or disordered eating; offering unsupervised therapy; encouraging harm or illegal acts; sexually explicit interactions; favoring validation over accuracy or safety; or optimizing engagement over those guardrails. The Attorney General could seek $25,000 per violation and harmed children or parents could sue. Vetoed by Governor Newsom October 13, 2025; veto consideration stricken January 22, 2026.
Companion chatbots.
California's SB 243 regulates companion chatbots, AI systems that give adaptive, human-like responses and can meet a user's social needs. Operators must disclose that the chatbot is AI if a reasonable person would be misled to think it is human, keep and publish a protocol against suicide and self-harm content with crisis referrals, and warn that companion chatbots may not suit some minors. Known minors get AI disclosures, break reminders at least every three hours and sexual-content safeguards (deleted January 1, 2027 by SB 1119). Annual reports to the Office of Suicide Prevention start July 1, 2027. Injured persons may sue. Signed October 13, 2025 (Chapter 677); effective January 1, 2026.
Enacts the New York artificial intelligence bill of rights to provide residents of the state with rights and protections to ensure that any system making decisions without human intervention impacting their lives do so lawfully, properly, and with meaningful oversight.
New York's A 3265 would enact the New York artificial intelligence bill of rights as new Article 5 of the State Technology Law, giving residents rights against persons developing automated systems that have the potential to meaningfully impact their civil rights, equal opportunities or access to critical resources: safe and effective systems, protection from algorithmic discrimination, data privacy, notice and explanation, and human alternatives. The Attorney General could seek penalties of at least three times the damages. Referred to the Science and Technology Committee January 27, 2025 and again January 7, 2026; it has not passed either house.
Artificial intelligence: defenses.
California's AB 316 adds Civil Code § 1714.46. In a lawsuit against a defendant who developed, modified or used artificial intelligence alleged to have harmed the plaintiff, the defendant may not argue that the AI autonomously caused the harm. Defendants may still raise any other affirmative defense, including evidence on causation or foreseeability, and evidence of the comparative fault of other people or entities. Signed October 13, 2025 (Chapter 672); effective January 1, 2026.
Law enforcement agencies: artificial intelligence.
California's SB 524 (Penal Code § 13663) requires every law enforcement agency to have a policy that official reports written fully or partly with AI name each AI program used, state "This report was written either fully or in part using artificial intelligence," and carry the preparer's signature verifying the facts. The AI first draft must be kept as long as the report, agencies must keep an audit trail, and vendors may not share or sell agency data except as allowed. Signed October 10, 2025 (Chapter 587); effective January 1, 2026.
Use of likeness: digital replica.
California's AB 1836 amends Civil Code § 3344.1 (post-mortem publicity rights). Anyone who produces, distributes or makes available a digital replica of a deceased personality's voice or likeness in an expressive audiovisual work or sound recording without prior consent from the rights holders is liable for the greater of $10,000 or the rights holder's actual damages. The existing exemption for films, TV, music and other expressive works does not cover such replicas. News, comment, satire, parody, fleeting or incidental uses and documentary or biographical portrayals not meant to pass as authentic recordings are exempt. Signed September 17, 2024 (Chapter 258); effective January 1, 2025.
An Act To Amend Titles 10 And 11 Of The Delaware Code Relating To Deep Fakes.
Delaware's HB 353 (84 Del. Laws c. 479), the Amelia Kramer Act, extends Delaware's intimate-image laws to deep fakes, meaning realistic but false sexual images made with generative adversarial network techniques or other digital technology. An identifiable person harmed by the intentional disclosure or threatened disclosure of a deep fake without consent may sue for damages or statutory damages up to $10,000, the defendant's gains, punitive damages, fees and an injunction. The violation-of-privacy crime now covers deep fakes without proof of an expectation of privacy, and an adult creating a depiction of a minor is an aggravating factor. Signed and effective October 9, 2024.
Elections: deceptive media in advertisements.
California's AB 502 rewrites Elections Code § 20012 on deceptive election deepfakes. No one may, with malice, knowingly distribute an ad or election communication with materially deceptive content (intentionally digitally created or altered media, such as deepfakes, that falsely appears authentic) of a California candidate or elected official, if material to voters or to election confidence, in the 30 days before an election, or of an elections official or voting equipment from 30 days before to 38 days after. Recognizable satire is exempt. Those depicted, candidates, committees and elections officials may sue. Urgency statute signed September 19, 2026 (Chapter 333); effective immediately.
Facial recognition technology, use of match as the sole basis of probable cause or arrest, prohibited
Alabama's SB 56 (Act 2022-420) bars state and local law enforcement agencies from using facial recognition technology match results as the sole basis to establish probable cause in a criminal investigation or to make an arrest; match results may be used for those purposes only together with other lawfully obtained information and evidence. Facial recognition technology is software that, to try to identify an unknown person, generates facial biometric data (a facial template), searches a database of many people's templates linked to identifying information, and returns matches by similarity. Signed April 14, 2022; effective July 1, 2022.
Artificial intelligence: transparency and governance.
California's SB 1159 makes clear that AI systems, autonomous agents, robots and other nonhuman entities are not 'persons' or 'members of the public' who can engage with government under the Public Records Act, the open-meeting laws, the Legislative Open Records Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, the Coastal Act and CEQA. People may still use AI or assistive technology for their own participation at an ordinary volume. Agencies may use AI detection tools, and knowingly using AI to falsely represent that a natural person engaged with an agency is banned. Signed September 30, 2026 (Chapter 863); effective January 1, 2027.
SCH CD-CYBER-BULLYING
Illinois' Public Act 104-0338 (HB 3851) amends the School Code's bullying prevention section (Section 27-23.7). Beginning with the 2026-2027 school year, "cyber-bullying" also includes posting or distributing an unauthorized digital replica, meaning a digital replica of an individual used without the depicted individual's consent, by electronic means if it causes any of the harms in the bullying definition. "Digital replica" has its meaning in the Digital Voice and Likeness Protection Act, which covers replicas made with AI or other technology. The act also lists posting or distributing sexually explicit images as a form of bullying. Approved August 15, 2025; effective July 1, 2026.
THERAPY RESOURCES OVERSIGHT
Illinois' Public Act 104-0054 (HB 1806) creates the Wellness and Oversight for Psychological Resources Act. No one may provide, advertise or offer therapy or psychotherapy services to the public in Illinois, including through Internet-based AI, unless a licensed professional conducts them. Licensed professionals may use AI only for administrative and supplementary support, need written notice and consent for supplementary-support AI on recorded or transcribed sessions, and may not let AI make independent therapeutic decisions, communicate therapeutically with clients or detect emotions or mental states. Civil penalties up to $10,000 per violation. Approved and effective August 1, 2025.
SOS-FACIAL RECOGNITION INFO
Illinois' Public Act 102-0354 (SB 225) bars the Secretary of State from providing facial recognition search services, or photographs obtained in issuing driver's licenses, permits or state identification cards, to any federal, State or local law enforcement agency or other governmental entity for the purpose of enforcing federal immigration laws. The ban does not apply to requests for facial recognition searches or photographs whose purpose relates to criminal activity other than immigration violations. It amends the Illinois Identification Card Act and the Illinois Vehicle Code. Approved and effective August 13, 2021.
AI Chatbots - Licensing/Safety/Privacy
North Carolina's S 624 (as filed) would require a Department of Justice license to operate or distribute a chatbot that deals substantially with health information, with a $50,000 civil penalty for violating G.S. 114B-5. It would also create a Chatbot Safety and Privacy Act: covered platforms would owe users a duty of loyalty and would have to disclose that a chatbot is not human, get consent each session and de-identify user data. Filed March 25, 2025 and referred to the Senate Rules and Operations Committee; it has not passed either house.
Prohibits the use of a facial recognition system by a landlord on any residential premises.
New York's S 8223 (same as A 6363) would add Real Property Law section 235-k making it unlawful for a landlord to obtain, retain, access or use, on any residential premises, any facial recognition system or any information obtained from one. Facial recognition covers identifying people from their faces and analyzing faces to judge sentiment, state of mind or dangerousness. The Attorney General could seek an injunction and a civil penalty up to $10,000, and affected people could sue. Introduced May 23, 2025 and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee (again January 7, 2026); it has not passed either house.
Creates a temporary state commission to study and investigate how to regulate artificial intelligence, robotics and automation; repeals such commission.
Vetoed. New York's A 4969 would have created a temporary New York State Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation Commission of 13 unpaid members to study state law on AI, robotics and automation, other states' regulatory approaches, criminal and civil liability, effects on employment and on confidential information, limits on use in weaponry, the impact of regulation on the technology industry, and public sector uses. Its final report would have been due no later than 30 days before the act's December 31, 2024 expiration date. The text matched Chapter 110 of 2019 except for that date. Passed both houses in 2023; vetoed by the Governor November 17, 2023 (Veto Memo 51).
Creates a temporary state commission to study and investigate how to regulate artificial intelligence, robotics and automation; and repeals such commission.
New York's Chapter 110 of 2019 (S 3971-B) created the New York State Artificial Intelligence, Robotics and Automation Commission, a temporary state commission to study how to regulate AI, robotics and automation, including current state law, other states' approaches, civil and criminal liability, employment, confidential information, weaponry, the technology industry and public sector uses. It provided for 13 unpaid members appointed by the Governor, legislative leaders and the SUNY and CUNY chancellors, with a final report due no later than 30 days before the act expired. The act expired and was deemed repealed December 31, 2020. Signed July 24, 2019 (Chapter 110); effective immediately.
An Act To Amend Title 21 Of The Delaware Code Relating To Autonomous Vehicles.
Delaware's SB 46 would bar an autonomous vehicle that requires a Class A commercial driver license without an O restriction from operating on a Delaware highway for testing, transporting goods or transporting passengers unless a human safety operator is physically present in it. Violations would carry a fine of $1,000 to $3,000, and $3,000 to $7,500 for repeat offenses within 3 years. Passed the Senate March 20, 2025 (18-0, 3 absent); reported out of the House Transportation Committee May 14, 2025; not yet passed by the House.
Providing for consumer protection and for artificial intelligence and chatbots; imposing duties on the Bureau of Consumer Protection in the Office of Attorney General; and imposing penalties.
Pennsylvania's HB 2175 (Printer's No. 2831) would add Chapter 71 to Title 12 on AI chatbots that use generative AI to converse with consumers and are represented as helping manage a situation or treat a condition, including mental health. Suppliers could not sell or share health information or consumer input except as allowed, could not advertise in chatbot conversations, and would have to adopt, file and follow a written disclosure policy. Fines up to $2,500 per violation. Introduced January 30, 2026; re-referred to Consumer Protection, Technology & Utilities March 19, 2026; not passed.
Prohibits the use of biometric surveillance technology by law enforcement; establishes the biometric surveillance regulation task force; and provides for the expiration and repeal of certain provisions
New York's A 1045 would bar police agencies, police officers, peace officers and state police members from acquiring, possessing, accessing or using any biometric surveillance system, or information derived from one, in their duties, and let a person sue for equitable or declaratory relief. Mobile fingerprint scanning, DNA index and fingerprint database comparisons are excepted. It would create a 12-member task force reporting between 2029 and 2030. Introduced January 8, 2025 and referred to the Governmental Operations Committee; it has not passed either house.
"GAI Accountability Act;" imposes civil penalties on generative artificial intelligence platforms engaging in harmful activity, including exploitation of children.
New Jersey's A 5090, the GAI Accountability Act, would make owners, operators and developers of generative AI platforms that do business in, are based in, or are accessible to residents of New Jersey civilly liable if they fail to prevent the platform from engaging in conduct that would be murder, assault, theft by deception or extortion, endangering the welfare of children, or creating child sexual abuse or exploitation material if done by a human. The penalty would be $20,000 per violation. Introduced May 14, 2026 and referred to the Assembly Science, Innovation and Technology Committee; it has not passed either house.
Relates to privacy rights involving digitization; provides that such right of privacy and action for injunction and damages shall include a portrait, picture, likeness or voice created or altered by digitization.
New York's A 3924 (the "right to your own image act") would amend Civil Rights Law §§ 50 and 51 so that using a person's name, portrait, picture, likeness or voice for advertising or trade without written consent covers one created or altered by digitization: software, machine learning, artificial intelligence or other technological means. Both the misdemeanor and the civil action for an injunction and damages would apply. Introduced January 30, 2025 and referred to the Judiciary Committee (again January 7, 2026); it has not passed either chamber.
Establishes certain requirements for social media websites concerning content moderation practices; establishes cause of action against social media websites for violation of content moderation practices.
New Jersey's S861 would make it an unlawful practice under the Consumer Fraud Act for a social media website to fail to publish and consistently apply its censorship, suspension and "anonymous" ban standards, to notify users of such actions, and to let users opt out of post-prioritization and banning algorithms. It would bar those algorithms for known candidates, with Attorney General fines of $100,000 per day (statewide candidates) or $10,000 per day (others), and let users sue over inconsistent standards or censoring without notice. Referred to the Senate Commerce Committee January 13, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Prohibits state agencies and state-owned entities from utilizing large language models or any artificial intelligence systems to make decisions that affect individuals' rights, benefits, or services; requires such decisions to be made by human personnel of the respective state agency or state-owned…
New York's A 7278 would add State Technology Law § 106-c, barring state agencies and state-owned entities from using large language models or any AI system to make decisions that affect individuals' rights, benefits or services; those decisions would have to be made by human personnel. Purely advisory use is allowed if a person makes the final decision, and AI may be used for data analysis and research. The attorney general could investigate and enforce. Introduced March 21, 2025 and referred to the Science and Technology Committee (again January 7, 2026); it has not passed either chamber.
Relating To The Hawaii Patients' Bill Of Rights And Responsibilities Act.
Hawaii's SB 2167 (2026) would have amended HRS chapter 432E, the Patients' Bill of Rights, to set prior authorization deadlines (one business day urgent, three non-urgent) and require that a denial initiated by an automated decision system be reviewed and co-signed by a board-certified specialist, with written notice to enrollees and providers whenever such a system is used. It was referred to HHS and CPN January 26, 2026 and died.
Automated driving systems; requirements for operation, civil penalties, report.
Virginia's HB 1125 (2026), in the proposed House Transportation Committee substitute (HB1125HC1), would have allowed fully autonomous vehicles (SAE level 4 or 5) to carry property or passengers commercially without a human driver if the Department of Motor Vehicles issued an autonomous operation license, and would have required $1 million in third-party liability coverage, set civil penalties of up to $1,000 per offense, and barred localities from prohibiting their operation. It was left in the Transportation Committee on February 18, 2026 and died.
A bill for an act establishing requirements and guidelines for conversational AI services, and providing civil penalties, and including applicability provisions.
Iowa's HF 2507 (formerly HSB 611) would have required operators of conversational AI services to protect minors (AI disclosures, no unpredictable rewards, limits on sexual and human-like content), adopt suicide and self-harm protocols, and not pose as licensed mental health providers. Attorney general penalties were the greater of actual damages or $1,000 per violation up to $500,000 per operator. After amendment H-8357, Senate File 2417 was substituted and HF 2507 was withdrawn April 15, 2026.
School Safety Firearm Detection Software Pilot Program; established.
Virginia's HB 1818 (2025 Regular Session) would have created a School Safety Firearm Detection Software Pilot Program under the Public School Security Equipment Grant Act of 2013, awarding grants for AI software that analyzes school security-camera video to detect firearms in two Title 1 schools in each congressional district. Left in House Appropriations on February 4, 2025; it failed.
Adopt the Artificial Intelligence Consumer Protection Act
Not law. Nebraska LB642, introduced by Senator Bostar, would have enacted the Artificial Intelligence Consumer Protection Act. Developers and deployers of high-risk AI systems that make consequential decisions without human review would have had to use reasonable care against algorithmic discrimination, with impact assessments, consumer notices and appeals, and Attorney General enforcement after a 90-day cure period. Indefinitely postponed April 17, 2026.
Regards AI-generated products, AI-systems acting as humans
Ohio's HB 813 would add sections 1349.12 to 1349.16 requiring AI systems to be programmed to put a distinctive watermark on AI-generated products, barring public or commercial distribution of AI-generated products without one, and requiring anyone using an AI system to clearly inform users whenever it is acting as or emulating a human. The Attorney General could seek an injunction and a civil penalty of $2,500 to $10,000 per instance. Introduced April 13, 2026; referred to the House Technology and Innovation Committee May 13, 2026.
SURVEILLANCE-BASED WAGES
Illinois's HB 4987 (104th General Assembly) would create the Surveillance-Based Wage Discrimination Act. A person could not use surveillance data as part of an automated decision system to inform the individualized wage paid to an employee. The bill sets exemptions, Attorney General enforcement, private rights of action and penalties. Re-referred to the House Rules Committee March 27, 2026.
CTA POLICE DEPARTMENT
Illinois's SB 4070 (104th General Assembly) would amend the Metropolitan Transit Authority Act to require the Chicago Transit Authority to set up a CTA Transit Police Department of sworn officers. It would also require a pilot of AI-based weapon-detection scanners at 5 to 10 stations and hubs and a limited facial recognition pilot. Referred to Assignments February 24, 2026.
ELEC CD-DECEPTIVE MATERIAL
Illinois's HB 1860 (104th General Assembly) would add Section 29-21 to the Election Code. A person could not distribute, or agree to distribute, materially deceptive media within 90 days before an election if the person knows it falsely represents a depicted individual, intends to harm a candidate or otherwise deceive voters, and intends to change votes by deceiving electors, with that result reasonably likely. Re-referred to the House Rules Committee March 27, 2026.
CHAT Act (Children Harmed by AI Technology Act)
The CHAT Act would require anyone offering a companion AI chatbot in the U.S. to require user accounts, verify every user's age (freezing existing accounts until verified), and link minors' accounts to a verified parent account with parental consent. Parents would be told immediately of any conversation involving suicidal ideation, and minors blocked from chatbots that engage in sexually explicit talk. Chatbots would show a pop-up at the start of each conversation and at least every 60 minutes saying the user is not talking to a human. The FTC and state attorneys general would enforce it. Pending in the Senate Commerce Committee since September 4, 2025.
ELEC CD-DECEPTIVE MATERIAL
Illinois's HB 3303 (104th General Assembly) would add Section 29-21 to the Election Code. A person could not distribute, or agree to distribute, materially deceptive media within 90 days before an election if the person knows it falsely represents a depicted individual, intends to harm a candidate and to change votes by deceiving electors, and both results are reasonably likely. Re-referred to the House Rules Committee March 27, 2026.
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE SAFETY
Illinois's HB 3506 (104th General Assembly) would create the Artificial Intelligence Safety and Security Protocol Act. As introduced, developers would publish a safety and security protocol, publish risk assessment reports at least every 90 days, and obtain an annual third-party compliance audit, with civil penalties. House Committee Amendment No. 1 narrows this to 'large developers' and adds whistleblower protections. Re-referred to Rules April 11, 2025.
Political communication; require to contain disclaimer if generated by artificial intelligence algorithms.
Mississippi's HB 1267 (2024) would require political communications generated in whole or in part by synthetic media using artificial intelligence algorithms to carry a clear and prominent disclaimer that they were generated using AI. It would add the same disclaimer duty for published campaign materials (Section 23-15-897) and for newspaper editorials or news stories generated by AI (Section 23-15-877). The bill text adds no penalty of its own for the new disclaimer duties. It died in committee on March 5, 2024.
Relating to the unlawful dissemination of intimate images.
Oregon's HB 2299 amends the crime of unlawful dissemination of an intimate image (ORS 163.472) so that "image" includes a digitally created, manipulated or altered depiction that is reasonably realistic, however stored. The crime applies when a person, intending to harass, humiliate or injure another, knowingly causes an image of that person's intimate parts or sexual conduct to be disclosed, knowing or having reason to know the person does not consent, and the person is harmed. It stays a Class A misdemeanor, or a Class C felony with a prior conviction. Signed May 22, 2025 (Chapter 116, Oregon Laws 2025); effective January 1, 2026.
Mississippians' Right to Name, Likeness and Voice Act; enact.
Mississippi's HB 1504 (2026), the Mississippians' Right to Name, Likeness and Voice Act, would give every individual, living or dead, a property right in their own name, likeness and voice, covering AI and other digital replicas. A person who, without consent, distributes a personalized cloning service or publishes a digital voice replica or digital depiction knowing it was unauthorized would be liable for damages. It died in committee on February 3, 2026.
Algorithmic pricing of essential consumer goods, granting rule-making authority, and providing a penalty.
Wisconsin's SB 1140 would restrict grocery retailers' use of personalized algorithmic pricing on essential consumer goods: required disclosure on each such price, no electronic display of those prices in grocery stores of 15,000+ square feet, no pricing that varies by protected traits, and no buying consumer data from data brokers for pricing. Introduced March 19, 2026 and referred to the Senate Licensing, Regulatory Reform, State and Federal Affairs Committee; failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1 on March 23, 2026, so it did not pass.
AI Product Liability Act
Illinois's SB 3502 (104th General Assembly) would create the Artificial Intelligence Design Requirements Act, setting rules for product liability actions against AI developers for defective design, inadequate instructions or warnings, and breach of express warranty. A deployer would be treated as a developer if it makes a material and substantial change or intentionally misuses the product contrary to the express warranty. Re-referred to Senate Assignments May 22, 2026.
To Prohibit Deceptive And Fraudulent Deepfakes In Election Communications.
Arkansas HB 1041 (2025), as engrossed, would have added Ark. Code § 7-6-106 to bar distributing, within 90 days before an election, synthetic media the person knows or should know is a deceptive and fraudulent deepfake of a candidate or party on the ballot, unless it carries a disclosure such as 'This content has been manipulated or artificially generated.' Depicted candidates could seek injunctions, and the State Board of Election Commissioners could fine violators up to $10,000, $5,000 or $1,000 depending on the case. It died in the House committee at sine die adjournment on May 5, 2025.
Fully autonomous vehicles; extend repealer on requirement that law enforcement interaction plan be submitted to DPS before operating.
Mississippi's HB 1770 (2026) would amend Section 63-35-7 to extend the repealer on the requirement that a person submit a law enforcement interaction plan to the Department of Public Safety before operating a fully autonomous vehicle without a human driver on public roads, moving the repeal date from July 1, 2026 to July 1, 2029. It died in committee on February 3, 2026.
AI Companion Model Safety Act
Illinois's SB 3384 (104th General Assembly) would create the Artificial Intelligence Companion Model Safety Act. An operator could not provide an AI companion unless it has a protocol to take reasonable efforts to detect and address suicidal ideation or self-harm, and would have to notify users they are not communicating with a human. Civil penalties would go to the Statewide 9-8-8 Trust Fund. Re-referred to Senate Assignments May 22, 2026.
Biometric Surveillance Act
Illinois's HB 5521 (104th General Assembly) would create the Illinois Biometric Surveillance Act. Law enforcement agencies could not obtain, retain, possess, access, request or use a biometric identification system, including through a third party or another government agency. It would give a private right of action and Attorney General enforcement. Re-referred to the House Rules Committee on March 27, 2026.
DIGITAL FORGERIES ACT
Illinois's HB 4763 (103rd General Assembly) would have created the Digital Forgeries Act. A person depicted in AI-made audio or visual material (a "digital forgery") would have a cause of action against anyone who, without consent, knowingly distributes it, creates it with intent to distribute, or solicits its creation, to harass, extort, threaten or harm, with reckless disregard of harm, or to incite violence or interfere with an official proceeding. It was not passed before the 103rd General Assembly ended (Session Sine Die, January 7, 2025).
PROTECTS VOICE & IMAGES
Illinois's SB 3248 (103rd General Assembly) would have created the No AI FRAUD Act, giving every individual a property right in their own likeness and voice, with a private cause of action against anyone who, without consent, distributes a personalized cloning service or publishes an unauthorized digital voice replica or depiction. Damages would include $50,000 or $5,000 per violation (depending on the conduct) or actual damages plus attributable profits. It was not passed before the 103rd General Assembly ended (Session Sine Die, January 7, 2025).
PUBLICITY ACT-USE OF AI
Illinois's SB 3325 (103rd General Assembly) would have amended the Right of Publicity Act to give recording artists additional enforcement rights and remedies, make liable anyone who materially contributes to, induces or facilitates a violation after having reason to know of it, and define AI and generative AI. It passed the Senate Judiciary Committee 7-0 but died at Session Sine Die on January 7, 2025.
CHATBOT PROVIDER-LIABILITY
Illinois's HB 5044 (104th General Assembly) would create the Chatbot Provider Liability Act. Chatbots would be deemed products for strict liability, and a chatbot provider would have a duty to ensure its chatbot does not injure a user and would be liable for injuries it causes a user even if it used all reasonable care or did not distribute the chatbot directly. Harmed users could sue for damages, injunctive relief and attorney's fees. Re-referred to Rules March 27, 2026.
POLICE-FACIAL RECOGNITION ACT
Illinois's SB 3564 (104th General Assembly) would create the Facial Recognition Technology in Law Enforcement Act. Law enforcement agencies using facial recognition would have to conduct compliance audits, and the technology could not be used to analyze images of people engaged in constitutionally protected activity (absent reasonable suspicion of a crime), for real or live-time identification, or solely based on beliefs, lawful activities or protected characteristics. Referred to Assignments February 5, 2026.
Relating to digital replication rights in the voice and visual likeness of individuals; providing private causes of action; authorizing a fee.
Texas HB 3950 (2025), as introduced, would have created a digital replication right in an individual's voice and visual likeness, and barred producing a digital replica or making one available to the public without the right holder's written consent. The right would last the individual's life plus 10 years, extendable. Eligible plaintiffs could sue over knowing violations, with statutory damages of $5,000 or $25,000 per work depending on the violator, and online service providers would have had notice-and-removal duties. It died when the regular session adjourned June 2, 2025.
BIOMETRIC DATA-COMMERCIAL USE
Illinois's HB 2411 (100th General Assembly) would have amended Section 15 of the Biometric Information Privacy Act to bar a private entity from requiring a person or customer to provide a biometric identifier or biometric information as a condition of goods or services, except as needed for employer background checks or employee security protocols. It would not have applied to companies providing medical services, law enforcement agencies or governmental entities. It was not passed before the 100th General Assembly ended (Session Sine Die, January 8, 2019).
BIOMETRIC DATA-COMMERCIAL USE
Illinois's HB 4330 (100th General Assembly) would have amended Section 15 of the Biometric Information Privacy Act to bar a private entity from requiring a person or customer to provide a biometric identifier or biometric information as a condition of goods or services, except as needed for employer background checks or employee security protocols. It would not have applied to companies providing medical services, law enforcement agencies or governmental entities. It was not passed before the 100th General Assembly ended (Session Sine Die, January 8, 2019).
Artificial intelligence.
California's AB 3050 (2023-24, as introduced) would have required the Department of Technology to set watermark standards, including digital content provenance, for covered AI-generated material (material that impersonates a specific individual or group or is represented as original), and barred AI-generating entities from creating it without a compliant watermark, with a civil penalty of $250 to $500. It would also have made creators of deepfakes using a person's likeness without permission liable for actual damages. Introduced February 16, 2024 and referred to committee; it died when the session ended.
Preventing Algorithmic Price Fixing Act: prohibition on certain price-setting algorithm uses.
California's SB 384 (2025-26 Regular Session), the Preventing Algorithmic Price Fixing Act, would have barred selling, licensing, providing or using a price-setting algorithm with the intent or reasonable expectation that 2 or more competitors in the same market use it, if the person knows or should know it processes nonpublic data to set a price, supply level, rent or occupancy level. Civil penalty up to $1,000 per violation. The Senate passed it 28-10; it was held in Assembly Appropriations on August 29, 2025 and was not passed before the session ended.
Workplace surveillance tools.
California's AB 1221 (2025-26 Regular Session) would have regulated workplace surveillance tools and employer use of worker data. Employers would have had to give affected workers 30 days' written notice before introducing a tool, and could not use tools incorporating facial, gait or emotion recognition technology, except as specified. Civil penalty $500 per violation. It was held in Assembly Appropriations May 23, 2025 and died under Art. IV, Sec. 10(c) of the Constitution on January 31, 2026.
Digital Dignity Act.
California's SB 1142 (2025-26 Regular Session), the Digital Dignity Act, would have imposed specified liability on a person who distributes content with actual knowledge it uses a digital replica and is found guilty of a crime requiring false impersonation or liable for defamation arising from the replica. It would also have required large online platforms with a generative AI tool to let individuals report digital replica content and to remove it on a court order. It was held in Senate Appropriations on May 14, 2026 and was not passed before the session ended.
Autonomous vehicles.
California's AB 33 (2025-26 Regular Session) would have barred delivering commercial goods through an autonomous vehicle without a human safety operator on California highways, with a $10,000 administrative fine for a first violation and $25,000 for later ones. The Assembly passed it 57-7 on May 29, 2025; it was ordered to the Senate inactive file on September 9, 2025 and not taken up again.
Mental health service providers; use of artificial intelligence system, civil penalty.
Virginia's HB 668 (2026 Regular Session) would have let mental health service providers use AI for administrative and supplementary support but barred using AI to provide therapy or counseling without a provider. As introduced, violations carried a civil penalty up to $10,000. It failed: left in House Communications, Technology and Innovation Committee on February 18, 2026.
Use of artificial intelligence-based tools; covered artificial intelligence, disclosure of use.
Virginia's HB 1294 (2026 Regular Session) would amend Code 19.2-11.14 to require police reports to disclose any use of covered artificial intelligence in a criminal investigation, and to require that AI-assisted report drafts be retained. Continued to 2027 in the House Communications, Technology and Innovation Committee on February 2, 2026.
Artificial intelligence; sexual abuse materials
Arizona's HB 2307 (2024) would have barred a person or entity that creates or uses an artificial intelligence system from allowing it to create, store or use child sexual abuse material, defined as a visual depiction of sexual exploitation of a minor. Only the attorney general could enforce it, with a civil penalty capped at $500,000 per violation or series. It was referred to House Judiciary and Rules, held in committees, and died without becoming law.
Fostering Access, Innovation, and Responsibility in Artificial Intelligence Act; established.
Virginia's HB 713 (2026 Regular Session) would have created the FAIR AI Act, requiring developers of base AI models to disclose listed items in their terms of service and limiting defenses in harm actions. As introduced it would have taken effect July 1, 2027. It failed: left in House Appropriations Committee on February 18, 2026.
Law-enforcement agencies; use of certain technology & interrogation practices; forensic laboratory.
Virginia's HB 1261 (2026 Regular Session) would direct the Department of Criminal Justice Services to set a framework for law-enforcement use of generative AI, machine learning systems and audiovisual surveillance technologies and for interrogations, with model policies and training. Continued to 2027 in committee on February 2, 2026.
Digital innovation & infrastructure; establishing rights in digital property & technology resources.
Virginia's HB 1521 (2026 Regular Session) would create the Virginia Digital Innovation and Infrastructure Act (Code 59.1-607 et seq.), establishing rights in digital property and technology resources, requiring risk management policies for critical infrastructure controlled by critical AI systems, and preempting local regulation. Continued to 2027 on February 2, 2026.
Fully autonomous vehicles; commercial use, civil penalty.
Virginia's SB 670 (2026 Regular Session) would regulate commercial use of fully autonomous vehicles that carry property or passengers for a commercial enterprise. Operators would need an autonomous operation license first. It passed the Senate 35-4 on February 12, 2026, then was continued to 2027 in House Transportation on March 5, 2026.
Law enforcement; artificial intelligence inventory, civil action.
Virginia's HB 1295 (2026 Regular Session) would add Code 9.1-116.11, requiring every state and local law-enforcement agency and sheriff's department to inventory the covered AI systems it uses and publish the inventory by November 1 each year. Continued to 2027 in the House committee on February 2, 2026.
Political campaign advertisements; synthetic media, penalty.
Virginia's HB 982 (2026 Regular Session) would have barred electioneering communications containing synthetic media from being published or broadcast without a conspicuous statement that the message may present conduct or speech that did not occur, with a civil penalty up to $25,000, a Class 1 misdemeanor for willful violations, and voter injunction suits. Left in committee on February 18, 2026; it failed.
Synthetic media; use in furtherance of crimes involving fraud, etc., report.
Virginia's HB 697 (2024 Regular Session) would have made it a Class 1 misdemeanor to use synthetic media to commit a criminal offense involving fraud, let the person depicted sue for actual damages and attorney fees, and had the Attorney General convene a work group on deepfake enforcement. It passed the House 98-0 but was continued to 2025 in Senate committee on February 19, 2024; it failed.
Artificial Intelligence Training Data Transparency Act; transparency and disclosure requirements.
Virginia's HB 2250 (2025 Regular Session) would have amended the Consumer Data Protection Act and added an Artificial Intelligence Training Data Transparency Act (new Title 59.1 chapter, §§ 59.1-607 through 59.1-611) with requirements for generative AI developers. It would also have allowed third-party opt-out of data processing and required consent to process adolescents' data. Left in committee on February 4, 2025; it failed.
Emerging Technologies, Cybersecurity, and Data Privacy, Division of; established.
Virginia's HB 2268 (2025 Regular Session) would have created a Division of Emerging Technologies, Cybersecurity, and Data Privacy in the Department of Law to oversee and enforce laws on cybersecurity, data privacy and the use of AI, with an annual report to the Joint Commission on Technology and Science by November 1. Left in Appropriations on February 4, 2025; it failed.
Law-enforcement agencies; use of certain technologies and interrogation practices.
Virginia's HB 2433 (2025 Regular Session) would have had the Department of Criminal Justice Services set a framework for law-enforcement use of generative AI, machine learning systems, audiovisual surveillance technologies and interrogations, with model policies by January 1, 2026 and agency policies by July 1, 2026. It also covered forensic laboratory accreditation. Left in committee on February 5, 2025; it failed.
Artificial Intelligence Transparency Act; established.
Virginia's SB 1161 (2025 Regular Session) would have created the Artificial Intelligence Transparency Act, requiring developers of generative AI systems that produce audio, images, text or video to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure on AI-generated content and to prevent downstream use without it. Passed by indefinitely in committee on January 24, 2025; it failed.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 8, Chapter 27; Title 56 and Title 71, relative to health insurance.
Tennessee's HB 1382 (114th General Assembly) would have required a health insurance issuer that uses AI, an algorithm or other software tool for utilization review or management based on medical necessity to ensure the tool bases decisions on the enrollee's clinical history and circumstances, does not rely solely on a group dataset, does not supplant provider decision-making, and does not discriminate or cause harm. Companion: SB 1261. Not passed before the session ended in April 2026; last action: Assigned to s/c Insurance Subcommittee (February 12, 2025).
Criminal Offenses - As introduced, prohibits a person or entity from distributing an electoral deepfake within 90 days of an election that the person or entity knows or should have known is a deceptive and fraudulent depiction of a candidate or political party; creates civil penalties and outlines…
Tennessee's SB 2321 (114th General Assembly) would have barred a person, corporation, committee or other entity, within 90 days of an election, from distributing an electoral deepfake that it knows or should have known deceptively or fraudulently depicts a candidate for state or local office or the candidate's party, unless the media carries a required AI disclosure. County election commissions could impose civil fines of up to $1,000, $5,000 or $10,000. Companion: HB 2214. Not passed before the session ended in April 2026; last action: Passed on Second Consideration, refer to Senate State and Local Government Committee (February 5, 2026).
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 2; Title 4; Title 8; Title 38; Title 39 and Title 47, Chapter 18, relative to synthetic media.
Tennessee's HB 2340 (113th General Assembly) would have let a person whose appearance, action, or speech is altered by synthetic media (made with AI or other digital technology), in a public communication knowingly distributed with intent to mislead the public and damage reputation, sue the publisher for an injunction and damages. Per the official summary, a disclosure that the media was manipulated would be an affirmative defense. Companion to SB 2460. Last action March 19, 2024; the bill never passed and died with the session.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 2; Title 4; Title 8; Title 38; Title 39 and Title 47, Chapter 18, relative to synthetic media.
Tennessee's SB 2460 (113th General Assembly) would have let a person whose appearance, action, or speech is altered by synthetic media (made with AI or other digital technology), in a public communication knowingly distributed with intent to mislead the public and damage reputation, sue the publisher for an injunction and damages. Per the official summary, a disclosure that the media was manipulated would be an affirmative defense. Companion to HB 2340. Last action March 13, 2024; the bill never passed and died with the session.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, relative to school safety.
Tennessee's SB 814 (114th General Assembly), as introduced, would have required the Department of Education to run a three-year pilot grant program for eligible LEAs (school districts) to buy AI weapons detection systems that identify weapons such as knives and firearms and immediately notify law enforcement and school administration. Companion to HB 933. The Senate Education Committee recommended it with amendments 9-0 on February 19, 2025; last action February 24, 2025; it died with the session.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 49, relative to school safety.
Tennessee's HB 933 (114th General Assembly), as introduced, would have required the Department of Education to run a three-year pilot grant program for eligible LEAs (school districts) to buy AI weapons detection systems that identify weapons such as knives and firearms and immediately notify law enforcement and school administration. Companion to SB 814. Last action March 18, 2025; the bill died when the General Assembly adjourned in April 2026.
Fair and Future Ready Housing Act; enact
Georgia's HB 715, the Fair and Future Ready Housing Act, would add Code section 8-3-224 to the fair housing law. Discriminatory housing practices resulting from AI or automated decision tools would be prohibited, reliance on such tools would not be a defense, and no person could use them to make sale, rental or financing determinations without individual review or without disclosing their use. After notice and hearing, the Attorney General could impose a penalty of up to $10,000 for violating subsection (c) or (d). The bill reached House Second Readers on March 6, 2025 and died when the session ended.
Trade Practices; surveillance based price discrimination and surveillance based wage discrimination; prohibit
Georgia's SB 164 would add Article 37 to Title 10, Chapter 1, prohibiting 'surveillance based price discrimination' and 'surveillance based wage discrimination', meaning use of an automated decision system to set individualized prices or wages based on surveillance data about a consumer or worker. Defined exceptions would apply, such as cost-based price differences. According to its title, it would provide civil penalties and enforcement. The bill was read and referred on February 13, 2025 and died when the session ended.
Impose penalties for AI models suggesting harming self or another
Ohio's HB 524 would bar any person from developing or deploying in Ohio an AI model or application that encourages any user to engage in any form of self-harm, including suicide, or to harm another person. The Attorney General could investigate suspected violations with subpoena powers, offer an opportunity to cease and desist and accept written assurances of voluntary compliance. Per its title, it would impose penalties. It was introduced October 15, 2025 and referred to the House Technology and Innovation Committee on October 22, 2025.
Declare A.I. systems nonsentient; prohibit legal personhood
Ohio's HB 469 would enact chapter 1357 declaring AI systems nonsentient for all purposes under state law and barring them from legal personhood, marriage, serving as corporate officers or directors, and owning property. Harm caused by an AI system would be the responsibility of the owner or user, and developers or manufacturers could be liable for design or instruction defects that proximately cause harm. Owners would have to maintain oversight, and owners or developers would have to report serious incidents. Introduced September 23, 2025; referred to committee October 1, 2025.
Modifies provisions relating to medical malpractice for the use of artificial intelligence by health care providers
Missouri's SB 1598 would provide that a medical malpractice claim includes a health care provider's negligent use, selection or implementation of artificial intelligence, or undue, detrimental or erroneous reliance on it, in diagnosing, treating and caring for a patient when that negligence or reliance directly causes or contributes to the injury. Such an action would have to be brought within two years of when the negligence or reliance was or should have been discovered. Referred to the Senate General Laws Committee February 5, 2026; the bill died when the 2026 regular session ended in May 2026 without being truly agreed to and finally passed.
Artificial intelligence; prohibiting distribution of certain media and requiring certain disclosures. Effective date.
Oklahoma's SB 894 (Senate floor version) would bar any person or entity, within 90 days of an election, from creating or originally distributing synthetic media it has actual knowledge is a deepfake of a candidate or political party on the ballot, unless the media carries the disclosure "This ___ (image, audio, or video) has been manipulated or generated by artificial intelligence." The State Election Board could impose fines of up to $10,000, $5,000 or $1,000. The Senate committee reported it do pass as amended; it was placed on General Order and died when the 2026 legislative session ended on May 14, 2026 without passing.
AGE-APPROPRIATE DESIGN CODE
Illinois' SB 50 is mainly a children's online privacy and design-code bill. As introduced, it would require covered entities (for-profit businesses over set revenue or data thresholds) to complete data protection impact assessments for services reasonably likely to be accessed by children, including whether algorithms and targeted advertising systems could harm children, and would bar profiling a child by default. Introduced January 13, 2025; re-referred to Assignments April 11, 2025 and still pending.
PRIVACY RIGHTS ACT
Illinois' SB 52 is a general consumer privacy bill. As introduced, the Privacy Rights Act would give consumers rights over their personal information and create a Privacy Protection Agency. Its AI-related parts are narrow: it defines profiling as automated processing of personal information, and directs the Attorney General to adopt rules on access and opt-out rights for automated decision-making technology and on risk assessments. Introduced January 13, 2025; re-referred to Assignments April 11, 2025 and still pending.
Surveillance and Investigatory Technology Amendments
Utah's H.B. 606 (Rep. Ryan D. Wilcox), Surveillance and Investigatory Technology Amendments, would have limited a law enforcement agency's use of surveillance or investigatory technology, defined to include facial recognition systems, biometric surveillance information, and location tracking, with "technology" defined to include AI technology. The limits would start July 1, 2027. The enacting clause was struck and the bill filed as not passed on March 6, 2026.
Protecting kids from deepfakes and exploitative images.
Wyoming's AI deepfake and child-protection law (Chapter 91, Session Laws of 2026, effective July 1, 2026). It makes it a felony to knowingly distribute realistic AI-generated or digitally altered intimate images of an identifiable person without consent when it causes or is meant to cause harm, or to threaten to do so for gain (up to 10 years; 12 for a repeat offense). Using AI to create child sexual abuse material, or knowingly possessing AI-generated material, is sexual exploitation of a child. Building or distributing AI systems designed to produce such material or to promote self-harm is a felony, and using AI is no defense to any crime.
Vehicle Code (75 Pa. C.S.) - omnibus amendments (Act 130 of 2022), including highly automated vehicles and platooning
Pennsylvania's Act 130 of 2022 rewrites Chapter 85 of the Vehicle Code on highly automated vehicles (vehicles with an automated driving system). Operating one on a highway requires a certificate of compliance issued by PennDOT after a self-certification, which is deemed approved if not rejected within 30 days. The act sets operation, commercial operation, enforcement and penalty rules, updates the Highly Automated Vehicle Advisory Committee, and makes PennDOT the lead agency on platoons of up to three vehicles. Most provisions took effect in 240 days (July 1, 2023).
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 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.
Ban on government social scoring with AI.
Wyoming's HB 91 (as introduced) would create W.S. 9-30-101 through 9-30-103 barring a governmental entity from using an AI system to evaluate or classify people on social behavior or personal characteristics to assign a social score that could lead to unrelated-context or disproportionate treatment or infringe rights, and from using AI to identify a person by biometric data or bulk image gathering in ways that infringe rights. A committee amendment would add law-enforcement exceptions. It would take effect July 1, 2026. The House Judiciary Committee recommended it amend and do pass 7-1, but the House did not consider it in Committee of the Whole; it died.
Modifies and establishes provisions relating to the protection of children and vulnerable persons
Missouri's 2026 HB 2273 (with HBs 1946, 1814 and 2551) creates RSMo 573.570, disclosure of an intimate digital depiction. Disclosing, or threatening to disclose, a realistic intimate image of an identifiable person that was created or altered by digital manipulation, with intent to harass or cause harm or with reckless disregard for harm, is a felony. A disclaimer that the image is unauthorized is not a defense. The same section was also enacted by HBs 2637 & 3155 and SB 999. It takes effect Aug. 28, 2026.
Possession of child pornography and providing a penalty.
2023 Wisconsin Act 224 creates the crime of possession of virtual child pornography (s. 948.125). Receiving, distributing, producing, possessing or accessing obscene material, including a digital or computer-generated image, that contains a depiction of a purported child (one that appears to depict a child, whether or not a real child) engaged in sexually explicit conduct is a Class D felony, or a Class I felony for an actor under 18. The act adds the offense to related surcharge, registry and background-check laws. It took effect the day after publication (published March 28, 2024).
Representations depicting nudity and providing a penalty.
2025 Wisconsin Act 34 adds deepfake intimate images to the state's representations-depicting-nudity law (s. 942.09). A "synthetic intimate representation" is a representation generated using technological means that uses an identifiable person's face, likeness or other distinguishing characteristics to depict them intimately and is realistic enough that a reasonable person would believe it shows that person. Posting, publishing, distributing or exhibiting one with intent to coerce, harass or intimidate is a crime under s. 942.09, and making a reproduction of a private representation without consent is also covered. It took effect the day after publication (Oct. 3, 2025).
An Act to revise a provision related to criminal invasions of privacy, prohibit the creation and distribution of digitally fabricated material of an identifiable individual, and provide penalties therefor.
South Dakota's 2026 SB 41 amends the invasion-of-privacy law (SDCL 22-21-4) to cover deepfake intimate images. Knowingly and intentionally creating, disclosing, distributing or selling, without the person's consent and with intent to gratify, harass or cause harm, digitally fabricated material showing an identifiable person nude or engaged in sexual conduct is a Class 5 felony. Digitally fabricated material is a visual depiction that appears authentic but is adapted, generated or modified to falsely depict a person's appearance, conduct or voice.
Disclosures regarding content generated by artificial intelligence in political advertisements, granting rule-making authority, and providing a penalty.
2023 Wisconsin Act 123 requires AI disclosures in political communications. Audio or video containing express advocacy, issue advocacy or support for or opposition to a referendum that contains synthetic media (audio or video substantially produced by generative AI) must say so: audio states "Contains content generated by AI" at the beginning and end, and video displays a disclosure such as "This video content generated by AI." Violations carry a forfeiture of up to $1,000 each. It took effect the day after publication (published March 22, 2024).
Urging Congress To Begin A Discussion Considering The Benefits And Risks Of Artificial Intelligence Technologies.
Hawaii's Senate Resolution 123 (2023) urges Congress to begin a discussion of the benefits and risks of AI technologies. It states that AI software wrote all of its whereas clauses in seconds when asked to "write an essay explaining the potential dangers of artificial intelligence," which should alert policymakers to the technology's power and dangers. It urges national leaders to evaluate AI in public sector identification technologies, such as law enforcement and military uses, and says universal safety guidelines, such as Asimov's three rules of robotics, should be considered. Adopted by the Senate April 5, 2023; a resolution of one chamber does not change the law.
Appropriation; artificial intelligence; border security
Arizona's SB 1707 (2026) would have appropriated $5,000,000 from the state general fund in fiscal year 2026-2027 to the Department of Public Safety for artificial intelligence relating to border security. The department could distribute the money to local law enforcement agencies to enforce border security using AI. The Senate Appropriations, Transportation and Technology committee passed it 6-4 on February 17, 2026, but it was held awaiting the Committee of the Whole and died when the session ended June 13, 2026.
AN ACT relating to mental health chatbots.
Kentucky's HB 641 (the Artificial Intelligence in Mental Health Act, as introduced) would add sections to KRS Chapter 367 regulating suppliers of mental health chatbots, AI systems that use generative AI to hold therapy-like conversations. Suppliers could not sell or share users' health information or input, would have to label and disclose any advertising, and would have to disclose every 30 minutes that the chatbot is AI. The Attorney General could fine up to $2,500 per violation. Introduced February 13, 2026 and referred to the House Small Business & Information Technology Committee; it died in committee when the session ended.
ALGORITHMIC PRICE TRANSPARENCY
Illinois's HB 4248, as the Senate amended it (Senate Floor Amendment 1), would create the Protection from Surveillance Pricing Act, banning surveillance pricing: customized prices for a consumer or group based on personal data. The House passed an earlier version 78-19 on May 22, 2026; the Senate passed it as amended 41-16 on May 31, 2026. The House has not concurred and re-referred it to the Rules Committee July 1, 2026, so it has not gone to the Governor.
Extends crime of identity theft to include fraudulent impersonation or false depiction by means of artificial intelligence or deepfake technology.
S 329 would expand New Jersey's identity theft crime to cover falsely depicting someone with a deepfake to gain a benefit or to injure or defraud them. A deepfake here is AI-generated or manipulated audio, video, speech or text that a reasonable person would believe shows the person, made without consent and likely to cause harm. Penalties would scale with the number of victims, from a fourth-degree crime (up to 18 months) for one victim to a second-degree crime (5 to 10 years) for five or more. Courts could order the deepfake destroyed and a public retraction at the defendant's expense. Pending in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
Prohibits the use of a wage-fixing algorithm in combination with personal or behavioral data to set or recommend wages or compensation
A 9638 would ban 'surveillance wages' in New York: employers could not use a wage-fixing algorithm, or its output, together with a worker's personal or behavioral data (such as financial, purchasing, browsing, biometric or location data, or profiles drawn from them) to set or recommend pay, whether the employer or a third party collects the data. Tools that use only job requirements, performance (not customer reviews), qualifications, labor market conditions or local cost of living are exempt. The Attorney General, the Labor Department and harmed workers could sue for the greater of actual damages or $3,000 per violation, tripled if willful. Pending in the Assembly Labor Committee.
Requires synthetic content creations system providers to include provenance data on certain content made available by the provider
Passed both houses; awaiting delivery to the Governor. S 6954-B, the Stop Deepfakes Act, would require providers of publicly available generative AI systems to attach provenance data (content credentials such as the C2PA standard) to AI-generated or AI-modified images, audio and video, identifying it as synthetic, the provider and when it was made. Hosting platforms could not knowingly offer systems that don't. Large online platforms would have to keep provenance data and show it to users, and state agencies would label their own media. The Attorney General could seek injunctions and fines up to $25,000 per violation. Effective 180 days after signing.
A bill for an act prohibiting personalized algorithmic pricing and surveillance pricing at certain food retail establishments, and providing civil penalties.
Iowa's SF 2278 (as introduced) would add Code chapter 554J for large food retail stores. Such a store using personalized algorithmic pricing based on a particular consumer's data would have to show "THIS PRICE WAS SET BY AN ALGORITHM USING YOUR PERSONAL DATA." Stores could not use electronic shelf labels, collect data of minors under 17 or use it for targeted ads or personalized pricing, or use protected class data in pricing. Civil penalty up to $7,500 per violation. Introduced February 11, 2026; it died in committee when the 2026 session ended.
Requires the owner, licensee or operator of a generative artificial intelligence system to conspicuously display a notice on the system's user interface that is reasonably calculated to consistently apprise the user that the outputs of the generative artificial intelligence system may be inaccurate.
New York's A 3411-B would add General Business Law § 399-zzzzzz requiring the owner, licensee or operator of a generative artificial intelligence system to clearly and conspicuously display a notice on the system's user interface that its outputs may be inaccurate. Failure carries a civil penalty of up to $1,000 for each violation, with each user not given the notice a separate violation. Would take effect on the ninetieth day after it becomes law. Passed the Assembly January 28, 2026 and the Senate March 9, 2026 (58-2, substituted for S934A); no delivery to or action by the Governor appears in the record.
Establishes disclosure requirements for AI-generated or materially AI-altered media depicting historically recognized human disasters when such media is publicly distributed; requires platform operators to allow the use of labelling; provides for enforcement by the attorney general.
New York's A 10047 would add General Business Law Article 47-A (§§ 1710-1716) requiring a person who distributes AI-generated content depicting a “historically recognized human disaster” that the person knows is materially deceptive media to label it “THIS (IMAGE, VIDEO, OR AUDIO) HAS BEEN MANIPULATED.” Platforms would have to allow labeling tools. The Attorney General could seek civil penalties up to $15,000 per day per violation. Referred to Consumer Affairs and Protection January 30, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Limits the use of automatic data systems in connection with employment; requires an employer shall provide a written notice that an automatic data system is being used; provides remedies.
New York's A 10251 would add Labor Law Article 38, “Automated Decision Systems” (§§ 1075-1081). Employers would have to give workers written notice at least 30 days before first deploying an automated decision system for employment-related decisions (other than hiring), could not rely solely on one for discipline, termination or deactivation, and would owe a post-use notice. A civil penalty of $500 per violation would apply. Referred to Labor February 12, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Establishes the "protect our privacy (POP) act" to impose limitations on the use of drones for law enforcement purposes; prohibits the use of drones by law enforcement at concerts, protests, demonstrations, or other actions protected by the first amendment.
New York's A 972, the "protect our privacy (POP) act," would add Civil Rights Law § 52-e: law enforcement data from drones equipped with facial recognition software, or from facial recognition run on drone video or images, including private drones, could not be used in ongoing investigations or prosecutions and would have to be promptly deleted, retroactively. It would also generally bar police drone use except for search and rescue and post-disaster inspection, bar drones at protests and armed drones, and allow suits for the greater of $1,000 per violation or actual damages. Referred to Governmental Operations January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
AI PRINCIPLES
Illinois's HB 3529 (104th General Assembly) would create the Illinois High-Impact AI Governance Principles and Disclosure Act. The Department of Innovation and Technology would adopt rules to make businesses using AI systems comply with 5 principles of AI governance and publish a report on their websites. It would apply to businesses with 10 or more employees. Re-referred to Rules March 21, 2025.
Imposes liability for misleading, incorrect, contradictory or harmful information to a user by a chatbot that results in financial loss or other demonstrable harm.
New York's A 222-A would add General Business Law § 390-f on chatbot liability. A proprietor whose chatbot acts in place of a human representative could not disclaim liability for materially misleading, incorrect, contradictory or harmful information that causes a covered user financial loss or other demonstrable harm (no liability if cured within thirty days of notice), and would have to tell users they are talking to an AI chatbot. Further duties would apply to companion chatbots (self-harm and minors). Reference changed to Science and Technology March 5, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Relation to the regulation of the use of artificial intelligence and facial recognition technology in criminal investigations
New York's A 7172-B would add subdivision 25 to Executive Law § 837, requiring the division of criminal justice services to promulgate a written protocol for law enforcement agencies using AI and facial recognition technology in criminal investigations. The protocol would cover transparency measures (records of AI outputs, subject to audit), regular independent audits of facial recognition systems with public results, and officer training. Would take effect on the 90th day after it becomes law. On the Assembly floor calendar (Cal. 396, June 3, 2026); it has not passed either chamber.
Clarifies the right of publicity including the definitions of who and what qualifies as a digital replica; provides guidance as to digital replicas that do not violate an individual or deceased individual's right to publicity; expands the statute of limitations for an action brought for violating…
New York's A 8611 would amend Civil Rights Law § 50-f to define "digital replica" as a computer-generated "highly realistic electronic representation" readily identifiable as a person's voice or likeness. Producing, distributing or making available a deceased personality's digital replica in an expressive audiovisual work or sound recording without consent would carry liability for the greater of $10,000 or actual damages, with news, commentary, documentary and similar exemptions. The post-mortem term would rise from forty to seventy years. Would take effect immediately. Referred to Judiciary May 22, 2025 (and January 7, 2026); it has not passed either chamber.
Provides for notice requirements where an insurer authorized to write accident and health insurance in this state, a corporation organized pursuant to article forty-three of this chapter, or a health maintenance organization certified pursuant to article forty-four of the public health law uses…
New York's A 1456 would add Insurance Law § 338 requiring accident and health insurers, Article 43 corporations and Article 44 HMOs to tell insureds on their public websites about their use or lack of use of AI-based algorithms in utilization review, to submit those algorithms and training data to the Department for certification that bias risk is minimized, and to have clinical peer reviewers document review of individual records before an adverse determination. Fines would be up to $5,000 per violation or $10,000 per willful violation. Referred to Insurance January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Establishes understanding artificial intelligence responsibility act requiring developers of covered models to be strictly liable for certain injuries.
New York's A 8833, the "Understanding Artificial Intelligence Act," would add General Business Law §§ 1510 to 1512. Developers of "covered models" (trained with over 10^26 operations at a cost over $100 million) would be strictly liable, regardless of care exercised, for injuries to non-users caused by model conduct that would be negligence, an intentional tort or a crime if done by an adult human, unless the user or a modifying intermediary intended or reasonably anticipated it. Defamation is excepted. Would take effect immediately. Referred to Science and Technology June 9, 2025 (and January 7, 2026); it has not passed either chamber.
Regulates the use of artificial intelligence in the provision of therapy or psychotherapy services by prohibiting the use of artificial intelligence to assist in providing supplementary support where the session is recorded or transcribed unless the patient is informed of the specific purpose of…
New York's A 9106, the "oversight of technology in mental health care act," would add Education Law § 6517. Only a licensed professional could provide or offer therapy to the public in New York, including through internet-based AI. Professionals could use AI only for administrative or supplementary support (with written notice and consent where sessions are recorded or transcribed), not for independent therapeutic decisions, direct therapeutic communication, unreviewed treatment plans or emotion detection. Civil penalty up to $50,000 per violation. Would take effect immediately. Referred to Higher Education September 26, 2025 (and January 7, 2026); it has not passed either chamber.
Relates to the development and use of certain artificial intelligence systems
New York's A 8884-A, the "New York AI act," would add Civil Rights Law §§ 105 to 115. Developers and deployers of high-risk AI used in consequential decisions (e.g. jobs, education, housing, health care, finance) would have to take reasonable care to prevent algorithmic discrimination, give notice and appeal with human review, get audits, report to the Department of Financial Services and keep risk programs; social scoring would be banned. AG civil penalties: up to $25,000 (developers) or $10,000 (deployers) per violation. Would take effect one year after becoming law (audits, two years). Amended June 1, 2026 and recommitted to Science and Technology; not passed by either chamber.
Enacts the "New York artificial intelligence transparency for journalism act"; requires developers of generative artificial intelligence systems or services to post certain information on the developer's website regarding video, audio, text and data from a covered publication used to train the…
New York's S 8331-A, the New York artificial intelligence transparency for journalism act, would add General Business Law Article 21-A (§§ 338 to 338-D). On or before January 1, 2027, and before each later release or substantial modification, AI developers would have to post the URLs, provenance, any removal of source identifiers or copyright notices, and collection timeframe for training data taken from a covered publication, and disclose their crawlers. A journalism provider could sue for injunctive relief and statutory damages up to $10,000 per violation. Referred to committee January 7, 2026.
Requires advertisements to disclose the use of a synthetic performer; imposes a $1,000 civil penalty for a first violation and a $5,000 penalty for any subsequent violation.
New York's S 1228-C would amend General Business Law section 396-b. A person in the business of dealing in property or services who, for a commercial purpose and with actual knowledge, places an advertisement in any medium featuring a synthetic performer would have to conspicuously disclose it in the ad, with a civil penalty of $1,000 for a first violation and $5,000 for each subsequent one. Ads for expressive works such as films, TV and video games are exempt if the use matches the work. Referred to Consumer Protection January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Requires publishers of books created wholly or partially with the use of generative artificial intelligence to disclose such use of generative artificial intelligence before the completion of such sale; applies to all printed and digital books consisting of text, pictures, audio, puzzles, games or…
New York's S 1815 would add General Business Law § 338 requiring books wholly or partially created with generative AI and published in New York to conspicuously disclose that use on the cover. It covers all printed and digital books, including text, pictures, audio, puzzles and games, regardless of the target age group. No penalty or enforcer is stated. The Internet and Technology Committee reported it to Consumer Protection April 1, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Restricts the use by an employer or an employment agency of electronic monitoring or an automated employment decision tool to screen a candidate or employee for an employment decision unless such tool has been the subject of an impact assessment within the last year; requires notice to employment…
New York's S 185-A would add Labor Law Article 37 (sections 1050 to 1057) limiting employer electronic monitoring and automated employment decision tools (AEDTs). Employers could not use an AEDT for an employment decision without an independent impact assessment within the prior year, repeated annually, or without 10 business days' notice; they may not rely primarily on tool output and must stop use if disparate impact is found. Monitoring must be strictly necessary and noticed in advance. It adds an employee private action with liquidated damages. Amended April 17, 2025; it has not passed either chamber.
Relating to regulation of the use of artificial intelligence systems in this state; providing civil penalties.
Texas's HB 149, the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act, bars developing or deploying AI intended to incite self-harm, harm to others or crime, with intent to unlawfully discriminate against a protected class (disparate impact alone is not enough), or solely to infringe U.S. constitutional rights, and making or distributing AI solely to produce or spread child pornography or unlawful sexual deep fakes. Government entities may not use AI for harmful social scoring or rights-infringing biometric ID. Agencies must tell consumers they are dealing with AI; health care providers must tell patients. AG enforcement; 60-day cure. Signed June 22, 2025; effective January 1, 2026.
Relating to the regulation and use of artificial intelligence systems and the management of data by governmental entities.
Texas's SB 1964 sets rules for AI used by state agencies and local governments. The Department of Information Resources (DIR) must adopt an AI code of ethics and minimum risk-management standards for "heightened scrutiny" AI (systems specifically intended to autonomously make, or be a controlling factor in, consequential decisions on access to government services), aligned with NIST's AI RMF 1.0, which agencies and local governments must adopt. State agencies and their vendors must assess such systems for risks of unlawful harm, agencies must give notice of public-facing AI, and vendors that do not cure violations can lose contracts. Signed June 20, 2025; effective September 1, 2025.
Relating to electronic health record requirements; authorizing a civil penalty.
Texas's SB 1188 is an electronic health record (EHR) law. Health care practitioners may use AI for diagnostic purposes, including recommendations on a diagnosis or course of treatment based on a patient's medical record, if acting within their license, the use is not otherwise restricted by law, and they review all AI-created records consistent with Texas Medical Board standards; they must disclose that use to patients. EHRs must be kept physically in the U.S. or a U.S. territory (for storage from January 1, 2026), and EHR algorithms that aid treatment decisions must include the recorded biological sex. AG civil penalties apply. Signed June 20, 2025; effective September 1, 2025.
Relating to prosecution and punishment of certain criminal offenses prohibiting sexually explicit visual material involving depictions of children, computer-generated children, or other persons; creating criminal offenses; increasing criminal penalties.
Texas's SB 1621 rewrites Penal Code § 43.26. Offenses for sexual material depicting an actual child cover images of a recognizable real child altered with AI or other software. New offenses cover a "computer-generated child": an AI- or software-made depiction appearing to be under 18 that a reasonable person would find virtually indistinguishable from an actual child. Intentionally or knowingly possessing or accessing such material is a state jail felony and promoting it a third-degree felony, with higher grades for prior convictions, volume and depictions appearing under 10. Signed June 20, 2025; effective September 1, 2025.
Relating to the creation of artificial sexual material harmful to minors.
Texas's HB 581 extends the state's age verification law (Civil Practice and Remedies Code Chapter 129B) to AI-generated sexual material harmful to minors in which a real person is recognizable. A commercial entity whose website has a publicly accessible tool for creating it, or that offers an app for creating it, must use reasonable age verification to confirm users are 18 or older, may not keep identifying information from the check, and must ensure anyone used as a source is an adult who consented to use of their face and body. Entities whose terms ban such material and that use technical tools to limit it are exempt. Signed June 20, 2025; effective September 1, 2025.
Prohibits the use of a wage-fixing algorithm in combination with personal or behavioral data to set or recommend wages or compensation; defines terms; establishes penalties for violations of such prohibition.
New York's S 9132 would add Labor Law § 194-c barring an employer from using a wage-fixing algorithm, or its output, combined with personal or behavioral data to set or recommend wages or compensation, whether the data is collected by the employer or a third party. The Attorney General or a harmed worker could sue for the greater of actual damages or $3,000 per violation, with treble damages for willful or egregious violations. Referred to the Labor Committee February 5, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Relating to criminal and civil liability related to sexually explicit media and artificial intimate visual material; creating a criminal offense; increasing a criminal penalty.
Texas's SB 441 widens the Penal Code § 21.165 crime from deep fake videos to any deep fake media made or altered with AI or other technological means. Knowingly producing or distributing sexually explicit deep fake media of a person without signed written consent is a Class A misdemeanor, or a third-degree felony for a repeat offense or a depicted minor. Intentionally threatening to produce or distribute deep fake media to coerce, extort, harass or intimidate is a new offense. It adds civil liability for AI intimate images, including against nudification app owners, and requires websites and apps to honor removal requests within 72 hours. Signed June 20, 2025; effective September 1, 2025.
Relating to biometric identifiers used in the performance of artificial intelligence.
Texas HB 3755 (2025), as introduced, would have amended Business & Commerce Code Sec. 503.001 (the biometric identifier law) to define artificial intelligence and to exempt AI training, processing, or storage unless done to uniquely identify a specific individual. If a biometric identifier captured for an AI commercial purpose were used for another, separate commercial purpose, the holder would become subject to the section's possession, destruction and penalty rules. It died when the regular session adjourned June 2, 2025.
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.
Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act.
Vetoed. California's SB 1047 (2024) would have required developers of covered AI models (trained with more than 10^26 operations at a compute cost over $100 million) to adopt safety and security protocols and full-shutdown capability before training, assess and guard against critical harms before release, hire annual third-party auditors from 2026, and report AI safety incidents to the Attorney General within 72 hours. The Attorney General could have sued for penalties. Governor Newsom vetoed it September 29, 2024, and the Legislature did not override the veto.
Conversational Artificial Intelligence Service Operator Requirements
Colorado's HB 26-1263 regulates operators of conversational AI services: public AI systems that mainly simulate human conversation (customer-service, business and other listed uses excluded). From January 1, 2027, operators must tell users the service is AI (daily, every three hours or persistently, and when asked), run a suicide and self-harm protocol with crisis referrals, and not claim outputs come from or are endorsed by licensed health, legal or mental health professionals. For known minors they must also guard against sexual content and simulated romance, avoid unpredictable engagement rewards and offer privacy tools. Signed May 29, 2026 (Chapter 208); act effective August 12, 2026.
Imposes liability for misleading, incorrect, contradictory or harmful information to a user by a chatbot that results in financial loss or other demonstrable harm.
New York's S 5668 would add General Business Law § 390-f on chatbot liability. A proprietor whose chatbot acts in place of a human representative could not disclaim liability for materially misleading, incorrect, contradictory or harmful information causing financial loss or other demonstrable harm (no liability if cured within 30 days of notice), and would have to give clear notice that the user is talking to an AI chatbot. Companion chatbots face self-harm and minor safeguards. Committee vote March 12, 2025; committed to rules June 13, 2025; referred back January 7, 2026.
Consumer Protection - Online Products and Services - Data of Children (Maryland Kids Code)
Maryland's HB 603 (Kids Code) covers for-profit firms doing business in Maryland that have over $25M revenue, buy, receive, sell or share data of 50,000+ consumers, households or devices yearly, or get at least half their revenue from data sales. For online products reasonably likely to be accessed by under-18s they must do impact assessments (existing ones by April 1, 2026) and set high-privacy defaults. AI-related: no default profiling of children without safeguards and need or a compelling reason; assessments weigh algorithm harms. Fines up to $7,500 per child per violation. Signed May 9, 2024 (Chapter 461; same as SB 571); effective October 1, 2024. Not enjoined; NetChoice suit pending.
Prohibits transcripts being made from video conference meetings by artificial intelligence without conspicuous disclosure during such meeting that such meeting may be transcribed by artificial intelligence.
New York's S 8459 would add Civil Rights Law section 50-h ("Right to Privacy; Transcription"). No person could permit a video conference meeting to be transcribed by artificial intelligence unless the meeting includes a conspicuous disclosure during the meeting that every attendee may have their words transcribed by AI. The text defines no terms and sets no penalty, enforcer or private right of action. Referred to Rules July 16, 2025 and to Internet and Technology January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Increasing transparency in artificial intelligence.
Washington's HB 1168 (substitute, 2025-26 biennium) would have required developers of generative AI systems released on or after January 1, 2022 and available to Washingtonians to post a high-level summary of their training data on their website by January 1, 2026 and before each later release. The Attorney General would have enforced it with a civil penalty of $5,000 per day and a 45-day cure notice. Its 1st substitute was recommended by House Technology in January 2025, was reintroduced January 12, 2026 and died at adjournment.
Artificial intelligence; disclosure of artificial intelligence-generated content required, enforcement provided
Alabama's SB 129 would require developers of generative AI systems that produce images, video or audiovisual content to include a clear, conspicuous and unavoidable disclosure that the content is AI-generated, plus metadata naming the tool and creation time, and to take reasonable steps to stop licensees and end users removing it. Violations would be unlawful trade practices with a private right of action. Referred to Senate Judiciary January 13, 2026; the bill died when the 2026 regular session ended without final passage.
Establishes the "AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility Act"
Missouri's HB 1769 (AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility Act), as introduced, would declare AI systems non-sentient for all purposes of state law, deny them legal personhood, marriage, corporate office and property ownership, and place responsibility for AI-caused harm on owners and users; developers and manufacturers could be held liable for design, construction or instruction defects. A House committee substitute (filed under HB 1746) was reported do pass on February 26, 2026, but the bill died when the 2026 regular session ended in May 2026 without being truly agreed to and finally passed.
Artificial intelligence, consumer protection
South Carolina's S 963 would enact the Consumer Protections in Interactions with Artificial Intelligence Systems Act (Chapter 31 of Title 37). Developers and deployers of high-risk AI systems used in consequential decisions would owe a duty of reasonable care against algorithmic discrimination, with impact assessments, consumer notices and appeal rights. The Attorney General would have exclusive enforcement. Introduced February 26, 2026 and referred to the Senate Banking and Insurance Committee; it has not passed either chamber.
Technology; deployers; AI chatbots; minors; age verification systems; emergency situations; effective date.
Oklahoma's HB 4083 (2026), as introduced, would have required deployers of generative AI chatbots to keep human-like features and social AI companions away from minors (under 18) using reasonable age verification, with an exception for qualifying therapeutic chatbots. Per its title, it would also have required emergency-situation detection and Attorney General and private enforcement. It was referred to Rules February 3, 2026 and died when the session ended May 14, 2026.
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.
Law enforcement: facial recognition and other biometric surveillance.
California's AB 1215 added Penal Code § 832.19, which barred law enforcement agencies and officers from installing, activating or using any biometric surveillance system, such as facial recognition, in connection with an officer camera (a body-worn camera or similar device) or its data, including by having another agency or a third party run it for them. Anyone could sue for equitable or declaratory relief. The section was repealed by its own terms on January 1, 2023, so the ban is no longer in effect. Signed October 8, 2019 (Chapter 579); effective January 1, 2020.
Relating To Antitrust.
Hawaii's Senate Bill 157 (2025), as amended in SD 2, would have made it unlawful for a software or data analytics service to collect rent, supply or lease-date data from two or more landlords, process it with computation (including to train an algorithm) and recommend rents, and for two or more landlords to engage in consciously parallel pricing coordination. Penalties would have reached $100,000 for individuals and $1,000,000 for entities. It passed the Senate March 4, 2025, was carried over to 2026 and not enacted. It stated a July 1, 2050 effective date.
Fourth Amendment Restoration Act
West Virginia's HB 2431, the Fourth Amendment Restoration Act (2025 regular session), would have barred law enforcement officers, and anyone acting for law enforcement purposes, from using seven listed technologies, including facial recognition, license plate readers and surveillance drones, unless a warrant based on probable cause authorizes use against a specific person. Knowing and willful use would be a felony. It was sent to House Judiciary on February 17, 2025 and went no further.
Synthetic Media: Liability; Elections
Alaska's SB 33 (2025-26) would have made a defamation action based on synthetic media a claim for defamation per se and barred a person from knowingly using synthetic media in an electioneering communication with intent to influence an election. A harmed individual could sue for damages, attorney fees and costs or seek an injunction. It was heard and held in Senate State Affairs on April 29, 2025 and died when the session ended May 20, 2026.
Various mental health and insurance matters.
Indiana's HB 1201 (2026) would have barred using an AI system to impersonate or substitute for a licensed mental health professional in interactions that must be performed by one (discipline under IC 25-1-9; a board could impose a civil penalty of up to $5,000 per violation). It also covered insurance: downcoding limits, mental health reimbursement parity with medical providers relative to Medicare, a 180-day audit and recoupment window, and out-of-network balance-billing limits. Referred to the Insurance Committee January 5, 2026; it was not passed before the 2026 session ended.
Children and Social Media
South Carolina's S 268, 'Children and Social Media', would add Chapter 80 to Title 39. Covered online services, which may include AI-based products, would owe minors a duty of care, face limits on data, notifications and profiling, and have to explain personalized recommendation systems and report on their algorithms. The Senate approved it 43-0 on second reading April 30, 2025 and gave it third reading May 1, 2025; it was then referred to the House Judiciary Committee.
Candidate Election Deepfake Disclosures
Colorado's HB 24-1147 bars anyone from distributing a communication about a candidate (including federal candidates and incumbents) with a deepfake to the candidate's electorate in the 60 days before a primary or 90 before a general election, if they know or recklessly disregard that the candidate did not say or do what is shown, unless it clearly states: "This (image/audio/video/multimedia) has been edited and depicts speech or conduct that falsely appears to be authentic or truthful." Secretary of State complaints bring civil penalties; candidates may sue for injunctions and damages. Qualifying news, satire and parody are exempt. Signed May 24, 2024 (Chapter 250); effective July 1, 2024.
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.
Concerning fabricated intimate or sexually explicit images and depictions.
Washington's Chapter 88, Laws of 2024 (SHB 1999) covers digitally fabricated sexual images, including those made with artificial intelligence. It adds "fabricated depiction of an identifiable minor" to chapter 9.68A RCW, so the child sexual exploitation offenses reach images created or altered by digitization. It creates a new crime of disclosing a fabricated intimate image without consent (gross misdemeanor; class C felony for repeat offenses) and a civil cause of action under chapter 7.110 RCW with statutory damages up to $10,000, punitive damages, fees and injunctions. "Digitization" expressly includes creating or altering images with artificial intelligence.
Establishing minimum requirements for the testing of autonomous vehicles.
Washington's Chapter 182, Laws of 2020 (ESHB 2676) sets minimum rules for testing autonomous vehicles on public roads under the Department of Licensing self-certification pilot program. Testers must carry at least $5 million in umbrella liability insurance (RCW 46.30.050). From October 1, 2021 (RCW 46.92.010), they must give the department contact details, testing locations and vehicle IDs, report collisions and moving violations annually, and notify local police or the State Patrol 14 to 60 days before testing. The department publishes the information and reports to the Legislature.
Implementing recommendations of the autonomous vehicle work group.
Washington's Chapter 193, Laws of 2021 (SSB 5460) implements recommendations of the state autonomous vehicle work group by amending the self-certification testing pilot program in RCW 46.92.010. It defines "autonomous" as a level four or five driving automation system under SAE J3016, and requires testers to give the Department of Licensing contact details, testing jurisdictions, vehicle identification and proof of insurance, file annual collision and violation reports, and notify law enforcement 14 to 60 days before testing. No autonomous vehicle may be tested on public roads until the information is filed. Section 1 takes effect October 1, 2022.
Concerning personality rights.
Washington's Chapter 69, Laws of 2026 (SSB 5886) extends the state's right of publicity (chapter 63.60 RCW) to forged digital likenesses: realistic visual representations or audio recordings of an identifiable person, digitally created or altered to be indistinguishable from genuine ones, that misrepresent the person's appearance, speech or conduct and are likely to deceive. Unauthorized commercial use of a forged digital likeness is infringement, subject to injunctions and damages; for a forged digital likeness the infringer is also liable for noneconomic damages. Infringement carries a $3,000 civil penalty plus actual damages.
An act to impose civil liability and prescribe criminal penalties for the nonconsensual creation or dissemination of deep fake sexual images; and to provide for remedies.
Michigan's Public Act 11 of 2025, the protection from intimate deep fakes act, covers deep fakes: realistic images, video or audio whose production depends substantially on technical means rather than impersonation. A person shown in a deep fake depicting their intimate parts or a sexual act may sue whoever created or disseminated it without consent, if the defendant knew or should have known it would cause harm or acted to harass, extort or threaten. Intentionally creating or disseminating such a deep fake is a misdemeanor, or a felony with aggravating factors. Platforms and general-purpose tool providers are exempt. Effective August 26, 2025.
An Act to amend Part 3 of Article 3 of Chapter 11 of Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to invasion of privacy, so as to revise the prohibition on electronically transmitting or posting nude or sexually explicit photographs or videos for purposes of harassing the depicted person; to provide for an increased penalty for the electronic transmission or posting to a web page that is accessible to the general public; to provide for related matters; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.
Georgia's SB 78 toughens the law against sharing nude or sexually explicit images of an adult without consent, including falsely created videos or still images such as deepfakes. Under the revised O.C.G.A. 16-11-90, posting such an image to harass the person or cause them financial loss is a felony (1 to 5 years, up to $100,000) when it is sent to a website that advertises or promotes sexually explicit content. Sharing by other electronic means stays a high and aggravated misdemeanor for a first offense and becomes a felony for repeat offenses. The law keeps the exemption for platforms hosting content posted by others.
candidates; digital impersonation; injunctive relief (now: digital impersonation; injunctive relief; requirements)
Arizona's HB 2394 (Laws 2024, Ch. 193) adds A.R.S. 16-1023. A candidate on a state ballot, or any Arizona resident, may sue a person who publishes a "digital impersonation" of them without consent: synthetic video, audio or image made with deep generative or AI methods to deceive viewers into thinking it is authentic. The main remedy is declaratory relief on an expedited schedule. Injunctive relief and damages are limited to sexual or nude content of private figures. Parody, satire and commentary are excluded, and interactive computer services are protected. The act carried an emergency clause, and the section applies 14 days after its effective date.
An Act amending sections 28-101, 28-661, 28-662, 28-663, 28-664, 28-665, 28-666, 28-907, 28-909, 28-941, 28-956, 28-957, 28-957.01, 28-966, 28-2157 and 28-3315, Arizona Revised Statutes; amending title 28, Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding chapter 31; relating to motor vehicles.
Arizona's HB 2813 (Laws 2021, Ch. 117) writes autonomous vehicle rules into Title 28. It defines automated driving system, autonomous and fully autonomous vehicle (SAE level 4 or 5) and related terms. A fully autonomous vehicle may operate without a human driver once the operator gives ADOT a law enforcement interaction plan and a written compliance statement, and the automated driving system is treated as the driver while engaged. It also sets crash-reporting duties for driverless vehicles, allows on-demand autonomous networks and autonomous commercial vehicles, preempts local fees, and provides an ADOT safety enforcement process.
An Act amending section 28-101, Arizona Revised Statutes, as amended by Laws 2019, chapter 89, section 1; repealing section 28-101, Arizona Revised Statutes, as amended by Laws 2019, chapter 89, section 1; amending title 28, chapter 3, Arizona Revised Statutes, by adding article 22; relating to personal delivery devices.
Arizona's SB 1305 (Laws 2020, Ch. 78) adds A.R.S. 28-1221 to 28-1228 on personal delivery devices: devices built to carry cargo in pedestrian areas and equipped with automated driving technology (software and hardware) that operate with remote human support and supervision. Only a business entity may operate one, with an agent able to monitor or control it. Devices may travel up to 12 mph in pedestrian areas and 20 mph on road shoulders, must yield to pedestrians, carry an ID marker, brakes and lights, and be covered by $100,000 of liability insurance. Local rules may not conflict. The article is effective from and after August 31, 2020.
Civil Actions - Product Liability - Artificial Intelligence Systems
Maryland's HB 712 (2026, first reader text) would have added Courts and Judicial Proceedings sections 3-2701 to 3-2706 letting people sue developers and deployers of high-impact or generative AI systems for harm from a dangerous or defective product (design defect, failure to warn, express warranty), with comparative fault, joint and several liability, and Attorney General enforcement. It had a House Judiciary hearing set for February 25, 2026 and died when the 2026 session ended.
An Act relating to personal delivery devices, providing penalties, and making penalties applicable.
Iowa's 2021 Acts chapter 119 (HF 304) creates Iowa Code chapter 321O for personal delivery devices: cargo-carrying devices for pedestrian areas, equipped with automated driving technology (software and hardware), that operate with remote support and supervision. A business may operate one only if an agent can monitor and remotely control it. Devices may travel at up to 6 mph in pedestrian areas and up to 20 mph on roads with speed limits of 40 mph or less, must yield to others, carry identification, brakes and lights, and be covered by at least $500,000 of liability insurance. Local governments may bar them from unsafe areas but may not otherwise regulate them.
AN ACT TO AMEND THE SOUTH CAROLINA CODE OF LAWS BY AMENDING SECTION 16-15-375, RELATING TO THE DEFINITIONS PERTAINING TO THE DISSEMINATION OF HARMFUL MATERIAL TO MINORS, SO AS TO DEFINE "IDENTIFIABLE MINOR" AND "MORPHED IMAGE"; BY AMENDING SECTION 16-15-395, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF FIRST DEGREE SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF MINORS, SO AS TO INCLUDE MORPHED IMAGES OF IDENTIFIABLE MINORS; BY AMENDING SECTION 16-15-405, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF SECOND DEGREE SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF MINORS, SO AS TO INCLUDE MORPHED IMAGES OF IDENTIFIABLE MINORS; BY AMENDING SECTION 16-15-410, RELATING TO THE DEFINITION OF THIRD DEGREE SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF MINORS, SO AS TO INCLUDE MORPHED IMAGES OF IDENTIFIABLE MINORS; BY ADDING SECTION 16-15-412 SO AS TO PROVIDE PROCEDURES FOR ARREST WARRANTS WHEN THE OFFENSE INCLUDES MORPHED IMAGES OF IDENTIFIABLE MINORS; BY AMENDING SECTION 23-3-430, RELATING TO THE SEX OFFENDER REGISTRY, SO AS TO INCLUDE THOSE GUILTY OF CRIMINAL SEXUAL EXPLOITATION OF MINORS IN THE FIRST, SECOND, OR THIRD DEGREE ON THE APPROPRIATE TIERS OF THE REGISTRY; AND BY AMENDING SECTION 23-3-462, RELATING TO TERMINATION OF REGISTRATION REQUIREMENTS, SO AS TO MAKE CONFORMING CHANGES.
South Carolina's Act 58 of 2025 (S. 29) targets digitally manipulated sexual images of real children. It defines "identifiable minor" and "morphed image" in S.C. Code 16-15-375: a visual depiction created, adapted or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexual conduct or is in sexually explicit nudity. Creating, distributing, receiving or possessing morphed images is added to the first, second and third degree sexual exploitation of minors offenses (16-15-395, -405, -410). New 16-15-412 limits arrest warrants for morphed-image offenses. It took effect on the Governor's approval, May 22, 2025.
An Act concerning crimes, punishment and criminal procedure; relating to sexual extortion; requiring the attorney general to prepare and provide educational materials and information concerning such crime; increasing the penalties for such crime when an offender is 18 years of age or older and the victim is less than 18 years of age or a dependent adult; creating the crimes of aggravated sexual extortion causing great bodily harm and aggravated sexual extortion causing death; amending K.S.A. 21-5515 and repealing the existing section.
Kansas HB 2537 (L. 2026, ch. 45, "Caleb's Law") rewrites the sexual extortion statute, K.S.A. 21-5515. The "image, video or other recording" used in a threat now expressly includes material created, altered or modified by artificial intelligence or any digital means to depict a person, whether or not that person was involved in the original. Penalties rise when an adult targets a minor or dependent adult, and new crimes of aggravated sexual extortion causing great bodily harm or death are created. The Attorney General must prepare educational materials.
Automated Decision-Making Technology
Colorado's SB 26-189 repeals and reenacts the 2024 AI Act as rules for automated decision-making technology (ADMT) that materially influences consequential decisions such as hiring, lending, housing and health care. Developers must document covered ADMT for deployers; deployers must give notice before use, explain adverse outcomes within 30 days and, on request, give correction steps and, where commercially reasonable, human review. Signed May 14, 2026 (Chapter 131); applies from January 1, 2027. A stipulated April 27, 2026 order in X. AI LLC v. Weiser bars AG enforcement of 2026 laws replacing SB 24-205 for violations through 14 days after a ruling on xAI's planned injunction motion.
AN ACT concerning motor vehicles; relating to autonomous motor vehicles; providing for the use and regulation thereof; establishing the autonomous vehicle advisory committee; amending K.S.A. 2021 Supp. 8-2106 and 8-2204 and repealing the existing sections.
Kansas SB 313 (L. 2022, ch. 93, K.S.A. 8-2901 et seq.) authorizes driverless-capable vehicles. A vehicle with an automated driving system that can perform the entire driving task and reach a minimal-risk condition may operate without a human driver, subject to conditions such as a human on board during the first year for vehicles with manual controls and a law-enforcement interaction plan filed with the Highway Patrol. Owners must carry insurance and meet crash duties; the Highway Patrol regulates and local rules are preempted. An autonomous vehicle advisory committee reports yearly.
AN ACT to amend and reenact subsection 13 of section 12.1-27.1-01 and section 12.1-27.1-03.3 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to sexually expressive images; and to provide a penalty.
North Dakota HB 1351 (2025) updates the law on sexually expressive images so it covers deepfakes. The definition in N.D.C.C. 12.1-27.1-01 now includes a "real, altered, or computer-generated" photograph or visual representation showing nudity or sexual conduct. Creating such an image surreptitiously, or distributing it to harm or humiliate or after notice that the subject does not consent, is a class A misdemeanor, and knowingly distributing an acquired image created without consent is a class B misdemeanor. A depicted person may sue for damages and attorney fees.
AN ACT to amend and reenact sections 12.1-27.2-01 and 12.1-27.2-04.1 of the North Dakota Century Code, relating to a prohibition on possessing certain computer-generated images; and to provide a penalty.
North Dakota HB 1386 (2025) covers AI-generated child sexual abuse material. N.D.C.C. 12.1-27.2-01 now defines a "computer-generated image" as one created through artificial intelligence or another computer program, and treats a computer-generated image made or altered to appear to depict someone under 18 as a minor. Knowingly possessing a motion picture, computer-generated image, photograph or other visual representation including sexual conduct by a minor is a class C felony, raised to a class B felony for 20 or more images, violent content, a very young victim or a prior offense.
Artificial intelligence; framework for person/entity acting as an independent verification org.
Virginia's HB 797 directs the Joint Commission on Technology and Science (JCOTS) to study whether to create a framework for independent verification organizations that would assess whether AI models or applications follow best-practice standards for preventing personal injury and property damage. JCOTS weighs the risks of AI deployed in Virginia, measurable risk metrics, existing mitigation standards, other states' approaches and the fiscal impact; if it recommends a framework, it also studies licensing such organizations. Report due November 1, 2026. Identical to SB 384; effective July 1, 2026.
Lower Grocery Prices Act
The federal H.R. 8229 (Lower Grocery Prices Act) would prohibit surveillance-based price setting for food, groceries and agricultural commodities: using an automated decision system to offer or inform a customized price for a specific person or group based on surveillance data. The FTC and state attorneys general could enforce it, and injured people could sue for the greater of actual damages or $3,000 per violation. Introduced April 9, 2026 and referred to the House Energy and Commerce and Judiciary committees; no further action.
Relating To Law Enforcement.
Hawaii's Senate Bill 2049 (2026) would have barred law enforcement agencies and officers from using biometric surveillance technology, meaning software that performs facial recognition or other remote biometric recognition, on any person. Exceptions would have covered reasonable suspicion of a crime, executing a judge-authorized warrant based on probable cause that an unidentified or unconfirmed person in an image committed a crime, and emergencies involving immediate danger of death or serious injury. It was referred to committees January 22, 2026 and not enacted.
AN ACT to amend the Code of West Virginia, 1931, as amended, by adding thereto a new article, designated §17C-24-1 and §17C-24-2, all relating to autonomous delivery vehicles; authorizing operation of low-speed autonomous delivery vehicle on certain streets and roads; authorizing operation of low-speed autonomous delivery vehicle on streets or roads with posted speed limit of up to a specified number of miles per hour under specified conditions.
HB 4675 lets autonomous or remotely monitored delivery robots operate in West Virginia. Personal delivery devices may use sidewalks, crosswalks and roadways with pedestrian-like rights, must yield to pedestrians, obey signals, carry an identifying plate with operator contact information, be monitored or controlled by an operator, and stay under 12 mph on sidewalks and 20 mph on roads. Small mobile carriers that follow their owner are also regulated. Owners must carry at least $100,000 of liability insurance, and localities cannot restrict the devices inconsistently with the article.
AN ACT to amend the Code of West Virginia Code, 1931, as amended, by adding thereto a new chapter, designated §17H-1-1, §17H-1-2, §17H-1-3, §17H-1-4, §17H-1-5, §17H-1-6, §17H-1-7, §17H-1-8, §17H-1-9, §17H-1-10, §17H-1-11, §17H-1-12, §17H-1-13, §17H-1-14, and §17H-1-15, all relating to establishing the Fully Autonomous Vehicle Act; defining terms; providing for construction of the act; providing requirements for the operation of fully autonomous vehicles without a human driver and with a human driver; providing for the operation of on-demand autonomous vehicle networks; providing for the operation of fully autonomous commercial and motor vehicle carriers; providing for the platooning of fully autonomous vehicles; providing for licensing, titling, registration, and insurance requirements of fully autonomous vehicles; providing for control and regulation of fully autonomous vehicles; providing for equipment standards for fully autonomous vehicles; and providing duties following a crash involving fully autonomous vehicles.
West Virginia's Fully Autonomous Vehicle Act (new Chapter 17H) authorizes self-driving vehicles on public roads. A fully autonomous vehicle may run without a human driver if its automated driving system can reach a minimal risk condition on failure, and the operator first files a law enforcement interaction plan with the Division of Highways/DOT and proves insurance or self-insurance to the DMV. The act also covers on-demand autonomous vehicle networks, autonomous commercial vehicles, three-vehicle platooning, crash duties and equipment standards, and bars local governments from banning or separately taxing autonomous vehicles.
An Act relating to motor vehicles operated by an automated driving system, and making penalties applicable.
Iowa's 2019 Acts chapter 75 (SF 302), codified at Iowa Code 321.514 to 321.519, sets rules for vehicles driven by an automated driving system, defined as the hardware and software collectively capable of performing the entire dynamic driving task on a sustained basis. A driverless-capable vehicle may operate on public highways with no human driver if it can reach a minimal risk condition after a system failure, can follow state traffic and safety laws, and is certified as meeting federal motor vehicle safety standards. Owners must carry liability coverage, and crashes must be reported. Driverless on-demand networks are allowed, and local governments may not add their own rules or taxes.
Relating to a prohibition on the use of artificial intelligence technology for classroom instruction.
Texas SB 382 (2025), as introduced, would have added Education Code Sec. 28.0028 barring school districts and open-enrollment charter schools from using artificial intelligence technology to provide instruction to students or to replace or supplement a teacher's role in instruction or interacting with students. It has no definitions, exceptions or enforcement provision. It would have applied from the 2025-2026 school year. It died June 2, 2025.
Public postsecondary education: generative artificial intelligence systems: procurement standards: training.
California's community colleges and CSU must, and the University of California is asked to, form a working group that by January 1, 2028 recommends procurement standards and user training for generative AI systems bought for education. Standards must require a documented risk assessment, safeguards against harmful output, no engagement-driven sycophancy, self-harm monitoring with human escalation, incident reporting, data-minimization and retention policies, and disclosure of training data sources. Until standards exist, each systemwide GenAI contract triggers a report to the Legislature within 60 days. Effective January 1, 2027.
Employment: automated decision systems.
California's SB 947 limits how employers, including public employers and labor contractors, use automated decision systems (ADS) such as AI tools, starting July 1, 2027. Employers may not use an ADS to violate labor or civil-rights laws, infer a protected status, or predict and punish workers for exercising their rights, and may not rely solely on an ADS to discipline or fire. When they primarily rely on one, a human must corroborate the output, and the worker gets a written notice and can request a description of their data used. $500 per violation. Signed September 30, 2026 (Chapter 859).
Elections: offenses; penalties for distributing materially deceptive media; provide for, and provide procedure for enjoining materially deceptive media.
Michigan's Public Act 265 of 2023 adds section 932f to the election law. Within 90 days before an election, a person may not distribute, or agree to distribute, materially deceptive media (an image, audio or video produced by artificial intelligence that falsely shows a person saying or doing something they did not) knowing it is false and intending to harm a candidate or deceive voters, unless it carries a disclaimer that it was manipulated by technical means. The attorney general, the person depicted, a harmed candidate or a voter group can sue for an injunction. Effective February 13, 2024.
Digital Content Authenticity and Transparency Act; established, civil penalty.
Virginia's SB 1417 (2025 Regular Session) would have created the Digital Content Authenticity and Transparency Act, requiring generative AI developers to apply provenance data to synthetic content and offer a public provenance tool and reader, with Attorney General enforcement and civil penalties. Passed by indefinitely in committee on January 24, 2025; it failed.
AN ACT TO AMEND THE LAW CONCERNING CRIMINAL OFFENSES RELATED TO POSSESSION OF SEXUALLY EXPLICIT MATERIAL THAT DEPICTS A CHILD; TO INCLUDE A COMPUTER GENERATED IMAGE THAT IS INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE IMAGE OF A CHILD; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.
Arkansas Act 977 of 2025 brings AI-generated child sexual abuse material under the state's child exploitation laws. "Computer generated" means produced, adapted or modified in whole or part using artificial intelligence; "indistinguishable" means an ordinary person would conclude it shows an actual child (drawings, cartoons and paintings excluded). The pandering, possession, distribution and viewing offenses, and electronic facilitation of child sexual abuse (Class B felony), now cover such images. Law enforcement, interactive computer services and good-faith AI adversarial testing are exempt.
Relating to motor vehicles; to authorize autonomous commercial vehicles operated by an automated driving system and commercial motor vehicles with teleoperation systems.
Alabama's SB 47 (Act 2019-496) lets automated commercial motor vehicles run on Alabama roads without a conventional driver on board if they meet the act's criteria, and lets commercial vehicles with teleoperation systems run with a remote driver who holds the proper license class. The act makes the Department of Transportation the sole state agency with jurisdiction over automated commercial vehicles and teleoperation systems, bars local governments and other agencies from adding their own requirements or taxes, sets accident and reporting duties, and keeps existing liability law. It took effect when approved on June 10, 2019.
Crimes & offenses, provides criminal & civil penalties for distribution of materially deceptive media intended to influence an election.
Alabama's HB 172 (Act 2024-349) makes it a crime to distribute materially deceptive media (AI-produced image, audio or video falsely depicting a person's speech or conduct) within 90 days before an election when the distributor knows it is false and intends to harm a candidate or deceive voters. A disclaimer stating the media 'has been manipulated by technical means and depicts speech or conduct that did not occur' avoids liability. A violation is a Class A misdemeanor; a second conviction within five years is a Class D felony. The Attorney General, the depicted person, candidates and voter groups may seek injunctions. Effective October 1, 2024.
Motor vehicles, use of motor vehicles equipped with an automated driving system.
Alabama's SB 226 (Act 2024-453) allows vehicles equipped with an automated driving system (ADS) to run on public roads without a conventional human driver on board if the vehicle can reach a minimal risk condition. A fully autonomous vehicle (SAE Level 4 or 5) may operate only with proof of at least $100,000 single-limit liability coverage. The act sets duties after a crash involving a driverless ADS vehicle (staying at the scene and giving registration and insurance details) and covers on-demand autonomous vehicle networks. Approved May 17, 2024; effective October 1, 2024.
Relating To Elections.
Hawaii's SB 2687 (Act 191 of 2024) adds HRS 11-303 and a remedies section to the campaign law. From February of each even-numbered year through the general election, no one may recklessly distribute materially deceptive media (an ad falsely depicting someone's speech or conduct, made with AI, GAN techniques or other digital technology) in reckless disregard of the risk of harming a candidate or changing votes. Media with a clear disclaimer that it was manipulated is exempt. Violations are a petty misdemeanor (misdemeanor for a repeat within five years; class C felony if meant to cause violence); the Campaign Spending Commission may fine and injured parties may sue.
Digitizations; create a criminal penalty for the wrongful dissemination of.
Mississippi's SB 2577 (Chapter 467, Laws of 2024) creates a crime of wrongful dissemination of digitizations: realistic images or audio altered or created with software, machine learning, AI or other computer-generated means (deepfakes) that a reasonable person would believe show real speech or conduct. Knowingly disseminating one within 90 days of an election, without consent and to injure a candidate, influence the result or deter voting, carries up to one year and $5,000, or up to five years and $10,000 if meant to incite violence or after a prior conviction. Officials, the depicted person, candidates and parties may seek injunctions. Effective July 1, 2024.
Establishes the "AI Nonsentience and Responsibility Act"
Not law. The AI Nonsentience and Responsibility Act (committee substitute for HBs 1746 & 1769) would have declared AI systems nonsentient under Missouri law: never persons, spouses, corporate officers or property owners, with AI-related assets attributed to a responsible human or organization. Liability for harm would rest with the deployer or user who directed the AI, and with developers for design defects or negligence; developers and deployers would have to maintain oversight following NIST-based risk standards and report serious harms. Two House committees approved it in March 2026, but it never got a floor vote before the May 15, 2026 deadline for passing bills.
An act relating to governmental structures protecting the public health, safety, and welfare
Vermont's S.124 (Act 166 of 2020) is a public safety act whose Sec. 14 imposes a moratorium on facial recognition technology: until the General Assembly authorizes it by law, a law enforcement officer may not use facial recognition technology or information obtained through it, except as permitted for drones under 20 V.S.A. 4622. Facial recognition covers automated or semi-automated identification of a person from facial characteristics and analysis of a face to infer sentiment, state of mind or dangerousness. The act took effect October 1, 2020; the Governor signed it October 7, 2020. Act 17 of 2021 later allowed use in child sexual exploitation investigations.
An act relating to miscellaneous judiciary procedures
Vermont's H.878 (Act 161 of 2024) is a judiciary omnibus. Its Sec. 45 amends 13 V.S.A. 2606, the crime of disclosing sexually explicit images without consent, so that a visual image includes a digital reproduction created or altered by digitization. Digitization means altering an image in a realistic manner using images of the person, images of other people or computer-generated images. Knowingly disclosing such an image of an identifiable person who is nude or engaged in sexual conduct, without consent and with intent to harm, harass, intimidate, threaten or coerce, is therefore a crime even when the image is a deepfake. The act took effect on passage; the Governor signed it June 6, 2024.
Provides for the Allen Toussaint Legacy Act.
Louisiana's SB 426 (Act 425 of 2022), the Allen Toussaint Legacy Act, gives each person a transferable property right in their identity, including name, voice, likeness and digital replica. A digital replica is a computer-generated reproduction of a performer's likeness or voice indistinguishable from the real one. Using a person's identity for commercial purposes without consent is a violation, and so is using a digital replica in a scripted audiovisual work or live dramatic performance to create the clear impression that the performer is actually performing a role. Remedies include the greater of $1,000 or actual damages, profits and injunctions. Effective August 1, 2022.
Criminalizes deepfakes involving minors and defines the rights to digital image and likeness.
Louisiana's SB 175 (Act 457 of 2023) adds R.S. 14:73.13, the crime of unlawful deepfakes. Creating or possessing material that uses deepfake technology to depict a minor engaging in sexual conduct is punishable by 5 to 20 years at hard labor (five without parole) or a fine up to $10,000, or both. Advertising, distributing, exhibiting, exchanging, promoting or selling sexually explicit deepfake material of a person without consent is punishable by 10 to 30 years or a $50,000 fine, or both, with at least 10 years served if a minor is depicted. Newsworthy, satirical and clearly disclosed works are excluded. Effective August 1, 2023.
Crimes & Offenses, raises max. age for offenses involving obscene materials with depictions of children, authorizes punitive damages for victims of those offenses, and directs Board of Ed. to require policies related to those offenses
Alabama's HB 168 (Act 2024-98), the Alabama Child Protection Act of 2024, extends the state's child sexual abuse material crimes to AI-generated content. CSAM now includes any visual depiction of a person under 18 engaged in sexually explicit conduct, including a virtually indistinguishable depiction created, altered or produced by digital, computer-generated or other means. Advertising, distributing or soliciting even purported CSAM is a Class B felony, each depiction is a separate offense, depicted individuals may sue, and school boards must adopt related policies. Effective October 1, 2024.
DIGITAL FORGERIES ACT
The enacted version of HB 2123 amends the Civil Remedies for Nonconsensual Dissemination of Private Sexual Images Act (740 ILCS 190). "Sexual image" now covers images that falsely appear to show a person's intimate parts or sexual activity, and a depicted person can sue anyone who disseminates, or threatens to disseminate, an intentionally digitally altered sexual image of them. Liability also reaches reckless disregard of whether the person consented. Disclosing that an image was digitally altered is not a defense. Effective January 1, 2024.
MEDICAID EXPANSION TASK FORCE
SB 2655's enacted text is a criminal-justice package. Its AI-related provision amends Section 11-20.4 of the Criminal Code of 2012 (obscene depiction of a purported child, which covers computer-generated images). It defines "indistinguishable" (an ordinary viewer would conclude the image shows an actual child) and limits "purported child" to a depiction indistinguishable from an actual child under 18, rather than one that merely appears to depict a child. Related penalty provisions are conformed. Effective March 21, 2025.
Establishes the right of publicity and provides for a private right of action for unlawful dissemination or publication of a sexually explicit depiction of an individual
Chapter 304 of 2020 adds Civil Rights Law 50-f, a post-mortem right of publicity. Using a deceased performer's digital replica (a realistic computer-generated performance) in a scripted audiovisual work or live musical performance without the rights holder's consent creates liability of at least $2,000, unless a conspicuous disclaimer says the use was not authorized. It also adds section 52-c, a civil action for a person depicted through digitization (realistic computer-generated or altered nude images or sexual conduct) against anyone who disseminates the material without consent. Effective on the 180th day after it became law.
Elections: deceptive audio or visual media.
AB 730 amended Elections Code 20010 and Code of Civil Procedure 35 to address election deepfakes. Until January 1, 2023 (later extended), no person or committee may distribute, with actual malice, materially deceptive audio or visual media of a candidate within 60 days of an election to injure the candidate's reputation or deceive voters. Such media is an image, audio or video intentionally manipulated so it would falsely appear authentic. Media disclosing that it has been manipulated is allowed, and the depicted candidate may seek an injunction and damages.
Depiction of individual using digital or electronic technology: sexually explicit material: cause of action.
AB 602 added Civil Code Section 1708.86, giving a depicted individual a private right of action against a person who creates and intentionally discloses sexually explicit material made through digitization (realistic computer-generated or altered depictions) when the person knows or reasonably should know the individual did not consent. It also covers a person who discloses such material they did not create if they know the depicted individual did not consent to its creation. Exceptions apply for matters of legitimate public concern and works of political or newsworthy value. A prevailing plaintiff may obtain injunctive relief, attorney's fees, and economic, statutory, and punitive damages.
Elections: deceptive audio or visual media.
AB 972 amended Elections Code Section 20010 and Code of Civil Procedure Section 35 to extend the 2019 election deepfake law (AB 730), which was set to expire January 1, 2023, to January 1, 2027. The extended provisions prohibit distributing, with actual malice and within 60 days of an election, materially deceptive audio or visual media of a candidate intended to injure the candidate or deceive voters, unless the media discloses it has been manipulated. Depicted candidates keep the right to seek injunctive relief and damages, with such cases given calendar precedence.
Elections: deceptive audio or visual media.
AB 686 amended Elections Code Section 20010 and Code of Civil Procedure Section 35 to extend the election deceptive media law (originally AB 730 of 2019, extended by AB 972 of 2022) from January 1, 2027 to January 1, 2031. The law prohibits distributing, with actual malice and within 60 days of an election, materially deceptive audio or visual media of a candidate intended to injure the candidate or deceive voters, unless the media discloses that it has been manipulated, and gives depicted candidates rights to injunctive relief and damages.
Relating to the protection of minors from harmful, deceptive, or unfair trade practices in connection with the use of certain digital services and electronic devices, including the use and transfer of electronic devices to students by a public school.
Texas HB 18, the SCOPE Act (2023), sets duties for digital service providers toward known minors. Its AI-relevant part is Business & Commerce Code 509.056, 'Use of algorithms': a provider that uses algorithms to automate the suggestion, promotion or ranking of information to known minors must make commercially reasonable efforts to ensure the algorithm does not interfere with its duty to prevent harm to minors, and must disclose in its terms or privacy policy how it uses algorithms and what personal data they use. Most of the act takes effect September 1, 2024.
Relating to financial exploitation or financial abuse using artificially generated media or phishing communications; providing a civil penalty; creating a criminal offense.
Texas SB 2373 (2025) targets deepfake scams. It defines artificially generated media as images, audio, video, text or other media created or modified with AI or other software with intent to deceive. A person harmed by knowing or intentional dissemination of such media or phishing for financial exploitation may sue for damages, profits, fees and injunctions; the attorney general may seek up to $1,000 per day; and new Penal Code 32.56 makes financial abuse through such media or phishing a crime graded by amount, up to a first-degree felony. Platforms and broadcasters are exempt for others' content. Effective September 1, 2025.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 55, Chapter 1; Title 55, Chapter 10; Title 55, Chapter 12 and Title 55, Chapter 8, relative to personal delivery devices.
Tennessee's 2020 personal delivery device law (Public Chapter 685, SB 2836) authorizes electric delivery robots that travel mainly on sidewalks and crosswalks and can navigate with or without the active control or monitoring of a natural person. The devices are not motor vehicles; they must yield to pedestrians, have lights and brakes, carry an owner ID and no placarded hazardous materials, and may go up to 10 mph in pedestrian areas. They are exempt from titling, registration and licensing, and operators must carry at least $100,000 of liability insurance. Effective July 1, 2020.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, Chapter 14, Part 1 and Title 47, relative to the protection of personal rights.
The ELVIS Act renames Tennessee's Personal Rights Protection Act and adds a property right in a person's voice, defined to cover a sound readily identifiable as a particular person 'regardless of whether the sound contains the actual voice or a simulation of the voice.' It creates civil liability for publishing or distributing someone's voice or likeness without authorization, and for distributing an algorithm, software, tool or other technology whose primary purpose is producing a particular person's photograph, voice or likeness without authorization. Record labels with exclusive contracts may sue. First Amendment-type uses are exempt. Effective July 1, 2024.
Unlawful dissemination or sale of images of another; penalty.
Virginia's 2019 law closes a gap in the crime of maliciously disseminating or selling nude or partially nude images of another person with intent to coerce, harass or intimidate (Code 18.2-386.2, a Class 1 misdemeanor). 'Another person' now includes a person whose image was used in creating, adapting or modifying a videographic or still image with intent to depict an actual person who is recognizable by face, likeness or other distinguishing characteristic, so deepfake intimate images are covered. Service providers are not liable for content provided by others. Effective July 1, 2019.
Unlawful dissemination or sale of images of another; penalty.
Virginia's 2019 law closes a gap in the crime of maliciously disseminating or selling nude or partially nude images of another person with intent to coerce, harass or intimidate (Code 18.2-386.2, a Class 1 misdemeanor). 'Another person' now includes a person whose image was used in creating, adapting or modifying a videographic or still image with intent to depict an actual person who is recognizable by face, likeness or other distinguishing characteristic, so deepfake intimate images are covered. Service providers are not liable for content provided by others. Effective July 1, 2019.
Facial recognition technology; local law-enforcement agencies, etc., authorization of use.
Virginia HB 2031 (2021) prohibited local law-enforcement agencies and campus police departments from purchasing or deploying facial recognition technology unless a statute expressly authorizes it, and required any authorizing statute to keep the data under the agency's exclusive control, confidential and reachable only by warrant. Agencies already using it had to stop on July 1, 2021. Facial recognition technology is defined as an electronic system for enrolling, capturing, extracting, comparing and matching geometric facial data; airports with commercial service are exempt. SB 741 (2022) replaced the ban with an authorization framework.
Concerning preventing certain disclosures of intimate depictions, and, in connection therewith, creating a cause of action for nonconsensual disclosure of an intimate digital depiction and adding and amending related provisions in criminal law.
Colorado SB 25-288 enacts the Preventing Unauthorized Disclosure of Intimate Digital Depictions Act. A digital depiction is a highly realistic image falsely appearing authentic that was created, altered or produced by generative AI, image editing software or computer-generated means. A person who discloses or threatens to disclose an intimate digital depiction without signed consent can be sued for actual damages or $150,000, exemplary damages, fees and injunctions; a disclaimer is no defense. It also extends sexual exploitation of a child to realistic computer-generated depictions of an identifiable child and updates the private-image offenses.
Relating to Elections -- Deceptive and Fraudulent Synthetic Media in Election Communications
Rhode Island's 2025 election deepfake law (R.I. Gen. Laws ch. 17-30) bars candidates, campaign committees, PACs, party committees and independent spenders from distributing synthetic media they know or should know is deceptive and fraudulent within 90 days of an election. Synthetic media is an image, audio or video of a person intentionally manipulated with generative adversarial network techniques or other digital technology to look real but give a fundamentally different impression. A clear disclosure that the media 'has been manipulated or generated by artificial intelligence' is a safe harbor. Depicted candidates may seek injunctions and damages. Effective on passage.
Relating to Elections -- Deceptive and Fraudulent Synthetic Media in Election Communications
Rhode Island's 2025 election deepfake law (R.I. Gen. Laws ch. 17-30) bars candidates, campaign committees, PACs, party committees and independent spenders from distributing synthetic media they know or should know is deceptive and fraudulent within 90 days of an election. Synthetic media is an image, audio or video of a person intentionally manipulated with generative adversarial network techniques or other digital technology to look real but give a fundamentally different impression. A clear disclosure that the media 'has been manipulated or generated by artificial intelligence' is a safe harbor. Depicted candidates may seek injunctions and damages. Effective on passage.
Relating to Criminal Offenses -- Electronic Imaging Devices
Rhode Island's 2025 amendment to R.I. Gen. Laws 11-64-3 makes the crime of unauthorized dissemination of indecent material cover sexually explicit or intimate images of an identifiable adult, including any image created by a digital device or altered by digitization, when shared without consent and with knowledge or reckless disregard of harm or intent to harass. A first offense is a misdemeanor and later offenses are felonies; threatening disclosure to obtain a benefit or demanding payment for removal is a felony up to 5 years. Platforms and telecom services are not liable for third-party content. Effective on passage.
Relating to Criminal Offenses -- Electronic Imaging Devices
Rhode Island's 2025 amendment to R.I. Gen. Laws 11-64-3 makes the crime of unauthorized dissemination of indecent material cover sexually explicit or intimate images of an identifiable adult, including any image created by a digital device or altered by digitization, when shared without consent and with knowledge or reckless disregard of harm or intent to harass. A first offense is a misdemeanor and later offenses are felonies; threatening disclosure to obtain a benefit or demanding payment for removal is a felony up to 5 years. Platforms and telecom services are not liable for third-party content. Effective on passage.
Relating to Criminal Offenses -- Impersonation and Identity Fraud
Rhode Island's 2026 identity fraud amendment defines a forged digital likeness as a computer- or other electronic system-generated visual representation of an identifiable person, or an audio recording of their voice, made to closely resemble a genuine one, likely to deceive, and created and distributed without consent. Digital forgery, knowingly creating or distributing such a likeness as genuine to facilitate fraud, is now felony identity fraud under 11-49.1-3(a)(8). The act also covers impersonating an entity with intent to defraud. Constitutionally protected activity, law enforcement and providers or developers of the underlying technology are excepted. Effective on passage.
Relating to Criminal Offenses -- Impersonation and Identity Fraud
Rhode Island's 2026 identity fraud amendment defines a forged digital likeness as a computer- or other electronic system-generated visual representation of an identifiable person, or an audio recording of their voice, made to closely resemble a genuine one, likely to deceive, and created and distributed without consent. Digital forgery, knowingly creating or distributing such a likeness as genuine to facilitate fraud, is now felony identity fraud under 11-49.1-3(a)(8). The act also covers impersonating an entity with intent to defraud. Constitutionally protected activity, law enforcement and providers or developers of the underlying technology are excepted. Effective on passage.
Vehicle Laws - Personal Delivery Devices - Standards and Requirements
Maryland SB 726 (2021) authorizes personal delivery devices: powered devices up to 550 pounds, used mainly on shoulders, sidewalks and crosswalks to carry property and capable of navigating with or without the active control or monitoring of an individual. They need no registration, must yield and obey traffic and pedestrian controls, are capped at 7 mph on sidewalks and crosswalks, and need ID markings, a controlled-stop system, lights and $100,000 of liability coverage. Operators file emergency response plans with the MVA and notify localities. Section 1 takes effect July 1, 2022; the rest July 1, 2021.
Revenge Porn - Definition of Visual Representation and Civil Action
Maryland SB 360 (2025) redefines visual representation in the revenge porn statute, Criminal Law 3-809, to include an image created with or without other existing depictions of a person that is indistinguishable from the person to an ordinary observer, including a computer-generated image; drawings, cartoons, sculptures and paintings are excluded. Knowingly distributing such intimate images without consent and with intent to harm remains a misdemeanor up to 2 years and $5,000. Victims gain a civil action for defamation per se or invasion of privacy against distributors, with attorney fees. Effective July 1, 2025.
Intimate Image Distribution Prohibition
Utah HB 193 (2021) created the offense of unlawful distribution of a counterfeit intimate image. A counterfeit intimate image is any visual depiction, including a computer-generated one, edited, manipulated or altered to depict the likeness of an identifiable person nude or engaged in sexual conduct. Distributing one without the person's consent, knowing or having reason to know it would cause emotional distress or harm, is a crime, with an aggravated offense when the person depicted is a child. Law enforcement and crime-reporting activity is exempt.
Requires that every newspaper, magazine or other publication printed or electronically published in this state, which contains the use of generative artificial intelligence or other information communication technology, shall identify that certain parts of such newspaper, magazine, or publication…
New York's S 6748 would add General Business Law § 338 requiring every newspaper, magazine or other publication printed or electronically published in the state that contains an article, periodical, photograph, video or other visual image wholly or partially composed or authored through generative AI or other information communication technology to conspicuously imprint a statement to that effect at the top of the page or webpage. No penalty or enforcer is stated. Referred to Consumer Protection January 7, 2026.
Facial recognition technology; authorized uses.
Virginia SB 741 (2022) replaced the 2021 local police ban with a regulated framework. Local police, campus police and the State Police may use facial recognition only for listed authorized uses, with systems approved by the Division of Purchases and Supply and evaluated by NIST at 98 percent true-positive accuracy or better with minimal demographic variation. The State Police publish a model policy, agencies report annually, a match cannot by itself establish probable cause for a warrant, and misuse is a Class 3 misdemeanor. The act states its provisions expire July 1, 2026.
Law-enforcement agencies; surveillance technology reporting.
Virginia HB 1496 (2024) creates an annual inventory of police surveillance technology. Every state and local law-enforcement agency and sheriff's office must give the Department of Criminal Justice Services a list of the surveillance technologies it has procured by November 1 each year. Surveillance technology expressly includes biometric surveillance technology such as facial, voice, iris and gait recognition software and databases, and software that integrates or analyzes surveillance data, including predictive policing software. DCJS shares the lists with the State Crime Commission and the Joint Commission on Technology and Science. Effective July 1, 2024.
Motor vehicles; use of personal delivery devices to transport cargo; authorize
Georgia's HB 1009 (Act 814 of 2022) authorizes delivery robots. A personal delivery device is a powered vehicle that uses an automated driving system to transport cargo, carries no passengers and weighs at most 500 pounds empty or 600 pounds loaded. Devices may operate on sidewalks and on highways with lower speed limits, must yield to pedestrians, meet equipment rules and may not carry hazardous materials. An individual able to control navigation and operation must monitor each device while it operates, and operators need at least $250,000 of liability insurance. Local governments may limit operations, and violations carry civil penalties.
Requires the collection of oaths of responsible use from users of certain generative or surveillance advanced artificial intelligence systems by the operators of such systems, and transmission of such oaths to the attorney general.
New York's A 1342 would add General Business Law § 394-cccc requiring operators of generative or surveillance advanced AI systems available to New York residents to make users create an account and affirm, under penalty of perjury, that they will not use the service to cause foreseeable injury, promote illegal activity, spread harmful content or knowingly spread false content meant to mislead the public. Operators would have to send each oath to the Attorney General within thirty days. Referred to Consumer Affairs and Protection January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
sexual assault kits; victim notification
Arizona HB 2482 (Laws 2023, ch. 154) moves the law enforcement crime victim notification fund to A.R.S. 41-2414 and puts it under the Arizona Criminal Justice Commission, which must use it to expand the state's automated crime victim notification system. The funded software must, among other things, "allow victims to leverage conversational artificial intelligence for bidirectional real-time communication with law enforcement agencies through voice, text messages and emails," with a virtual agent that answers and asks questions based on the victim's questions and responses. The act also set up a temporary sexual assault kit study committee. Approved May 19, 2023.
Establishes "New Jersey Advanced Autonomous Vehicle Task Force."
New Jersey's AJR 164, enacted as P.L. 2019, Joint Resolution No. 2, created the New Jersey Advanced Autonomous Vehicle Task Force to study vehicles with SAE driving automation level 3, 4 or 5 and recommend laws to integrate them safely on state roads. Its 11 members include the Transportation Commissioner, the Motor Vehicle Commission chief administrator and public members with autonomous vehicle expertise. Within 180 days of its first meeting it had to report on state laws that may impede testing, on licensing, insurance, liability and infrastructure, and recommend pilot programs. It took effect immediately on approval (March 18, 2019) and expires when the report is issued.
Prohibits the use of biometric surveillance system or biometric surveillance information in places of public accommodation; prohibits entering into any agreement that authorizes any third party to use any biometric surveillance system or biometric surveillance information; provides penalties for…
New York's S 8004 would add Civil Rights Law § 40-h making it unlawful for an owner, franchisor, franchisee or other operator of a place or provider of public accommodation to use any biometric surveillance system or its information, or let a third party do so on its behalf. Collecting biometric information would require written notice, a stated purpose and term, and a written release. Violators and those who aid or incite them would owe the aggrieved person at least the greater of $1,000 or actual damages per violation, plus attorneys' fees. Referred to Investigations and Government Operations January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Enacts the "New York artificial intelligence consumer protection act", in relation to preventing the use of artificial intelligence algorithms to discriminate against protected classes.
New York's S 1962, the New York artificial intelligence consumer protection act, would add General Business Law Article 45-A (sections 1550 to 1556). From January 1, 2027, developers and deployers of high-risk AI decision systems that make or substantially factor in consequential decisions (education, employment, lending, government services, health care, housing, insurance, legal services) would have to use reasonable care against algorithmic discrimination, with impact assessments, notices and appeals. The Attorney General would have exclusive enforcement. Referred to Internet and Technology January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Establishes the crime of unlawful dissemination or publication of a fabricated photographic, videographic, or audio record as a class E felony.
New York's A 1280 would add Penal Law § 245.20, making it a class E felony to intentionally create and then disseminate or publish, without consent and with intent to cause harm to the liberty or emotional, social, financial or physical welfare of an identifiable person, a fabricated photographic, videographic or audio record. Such a record would have to look indistinguishable from reality and be manipulated or artificial, including through AI such as deepfakes. Several exemptions apply, including parody, news reporting and platforms. Referred to Codes January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
TO CREATE A PRIVATE RIGHT OF ACTION AGAINST A SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM THAT CAUSES HARM; AND TO IMPOSE A CIVIL PENALTY ON A SOCIAL MEDIA PLATFORM THAT KNOWINGLY AND WILLFULLY CONTRIBUTES TO A MINOR'S SUICIDE OR SUICIDE ATTEMPT.
Arkansas's SB 612 (Act 901 of 2025) adds Arkansas Code 4-88-1501 and following. A social media platform may not use a design, algorithm or feature that it knows, or should have known through reasonable care, causes a user to purchase a controlled substance, develop an eating disorder, commit or attempt suicide, or develop or sustain an addiction to the platform. "Promoting" content to a minor (under 16) includes algorithmic promotion based on previous searches or engagement. The act creates a private right of action for harm and a civil penalty for a platform that knowingly and willfully contributes to a minor's suicide or attempted suicide. Act date April 21, 2025.
Social Media Amendments
Utah's HB 464 (Laws of Utah 2024, chapter 224) adds Utah Code 78B-3-1101 to -1103 on harm to minors from an "algorithmically curated social media service," one that drives engagement mainly through a curation algorithm (a process that personalizes which content a user sees and how, to encourage engagement) and engagement-driven design. A Utah minor account holder or parent may sue the company for a diagnosed adverse mental health outcome caused by the minor's excessive use, with a rebuttable presumption that the curation algorithm and design caused it; a company that complies with specified safeguards gets the opposite presumption. These sections took effect October 1, 2024.
Personal delivery devices; authorizing certain use; limiting certain jurisdictional powers. Effective date.
Oklahoma's SB 706 (2021) authorizes delivery robots. Personal delivery devices are electrically powered cargo devices of up to 550 pounds equipped with automated driving technology for operation with remote support and supervision. Devices may use sidewalks, crosswalks and local roads if they carry an identifying number and operator contact information, obey traffic signals, do not exceed 10 mph on sidewalks, have a controlled-stop system and lights, and do not carry placarded hazardous materials. Operators need $100,000 of liability insurance. Local governments may ban them but not regulate their design. Effective November 1, 2021.
CRIMES AGAINST CHILDREN – Amends and adds to existing law to provide for the crime of visual representations of the sexual abuse of children and to revise provisions regarding the Internet Crimes Against Children Unit.
Idaho's H 465 (2024) targets AI-generated child sexual abuse material. New section 18-1507C makes it a felony, punishable by up to five years and a $5,000 fine, to knowingly produce, distribute, receive, possess or access an obscene visual depiction of a child in explicit sexual conduct, 'including a video or image created using generative AI or machine learning', and the child depicted need not actually exist. Receiving or possessing five or fewer such images is excused if they were promptly destroyed or reported to police. The act also expands sexual exploitation of a child (18-1507) to material altered to show an identifiable child. Effective July 1, 2024.
Excludes a production using artificial intelligence or autonomous vehicles in a manner which results in the displacement of employees whose salaries are qualified expenses from the definition of qualified film for the purposes of the empire state film production credit.
New York's S 6751 would amend Tax Law § 24 so that a production using artificial intelligence or autonomous vehicles in a manner that results in the displacement of employees whose salaries are qualified expenses is not a "qualified film" for the Empire State film production credit, unless a current collective bargaining agreement covering those employees permits the replacement. It creates no direct duty or penalty; the consequence is ineligibility for the credit. Referred to committee January 7, 2026.
ELECTIONEERING COMMUNICATIONS – Freedom From AI-Rigged (FAIR) Elections Act: relief and actions over synthetic media in electioneering communications
Idaho's H 664 (2024), the Freedom From AI-Rigged (FAIR) Elections Act, targets deepfakes in campaign ads. Synthetic media is audio or video of a person's speech or conduct created with generative adversarial network techniques or other digital technology so that it seems real but shows something that did not happen. A candidate deceptively shown in synthetic media in an electioneering communication may seek an injunction and sue the content creator for damages and attorney's fees. Including the disclosure 'This (video/audio) has been manipulated', shown or read as the law specifies, is an affirmative defense. It took effect March 25, 2024.
California AI Transparency Act.
California's SB 942, the California AI Transparency Act, as amended, requires anyone who produces a generative AI system publicly accessible in California to offer a free, public disclosure verification tool and, where technically feasible, embed hard-to-remove latent disclosures (provider, system and version, time and date, unique ID, whether AI created or altered it) in AI image, video and audio output. Penalty: $5,000 per violation, each day a separate violation. SB 1000 (Chapter 861), effective September 30, 2026, dropped the original 1,000,000-user threshold and the visible-label option. Signed September 19, 2024 (Chapter 291); duties operative August 2, 2026, as moved by AB 853.
Use of digitally altered media in elections
Indiana's HB 1133 (P.L. 81-2024) regulates deepfakes in campaign ads. Fabricated media includes undetectably altered recordings, lifelike artificially generated imitations of a person made without consent, and media of an artificially generated person. If a campaign communication includes fabricated media depicting a candidate, whoever paid for it must include the disclaimer 'Elements of this media have been digitally altered or artificially generated,' shown or read as the law specifies. A depicted candidate may sue for damages, injunctive relief and attorney's fees if the disclaimer is missing. It took effect on passage.
DEFIANCE Act of 2025 Disrupt Explicit Forged Images And Non-Consensual Edits Act of 2025
The federal S. 1837 (DEFIANCE Act of 2025) would let an identifiable individual sue over intimate digital forgeries: sexually intimate images made with software, machine learning or AI that are indistinguishable from authentic ones to a reasonable person. Defendants who knowingly produce, possess with intent to disclose, disclose, or solicit and receive them could owe liquidated damages of $150,000 ($250,000 in cases tied to sexual assault, stalking or harassment), plus fees and injunctions. Passed the Senate by unanimous consent January 13, 2026 and held at the desk in the House.
Revise laws related to use of name, voice, and likeness of individuals and penalties for unauthorized use
Montana's HB 513 (Chapter 685 of 2025) gives Montana residents property rights in their name, voice and visual likeness that can be licensed, inherited and enforced for 20 years after death. Without consent, a person is liable for distributing an algorithm, software or tool knowing its primary purpose is to produce unauthorized digital voice or visual depictions of a particular person for commercial use, or for knowingly publishing such a depiction for commercial use. Remedies are actual damages plus profits, with exceptions for news, commentary, satire, parody and similar First Amendment uses. Effective January 1, 2026.
Criminalize use of real and digitally fabricated sexually explicit images
Montana's HB 514 (Chapter 686 of 2025) extends the offense of violating privacy in communications to digitally fabricated intimate images. Digitally fabricated means created with technical means, such as artificial intelligence, to realistically show an identifiable person doing something they did not do. It is a crime to publish, distribute or disclose real or fabricated nude or sexual images of an identifiable person without consent to terrify, intimidate, threaten, harass, injure or get money, or to possess them and threaten disclosure for money. A first offense is a misdemeanor; a second or later is a felony with up to five years and a $25,000 fine. Effective October 1, 2025.
Generally revise laws related to privacy and facial recognition technology
Montana's SB 397 (Chapter 781 of 2023), the Facial Recognition for Government Use Act, bars state and local agencies, law enforcement, public employees and officials from using continuous facial surveillance and, with exceptions, from obtaining or using facial recognition technology or contracting vendors for it. The Department of Justice and local police may use it in criminal investigations under restrictions, including a warrant requirement, must tell defendants before trial, and must report use annually. Agencies may use facial verification only under a written use and privacy policy, with notice, vendor retention limits and human review training. People harmed may sue.
To amend the law concerning autonomous vehicles
Arkansas's HB 1562 (Act 619 of 2021) updates the state's autonomous vehicle law. Autonomous and fully autonomous vehicles operate under State Highway Commission pilot programs, which must show the vehicles obey traffic laws, including at railroad crossings unless exempted, reach a minimal risk condition if the automated driving system fails, meet federal safety standards, and that a remote operator can meet crash duties. On-demand driverless capable vehicle networks may carry passengers or goods. Human and remote operators need valid driver's licenses, local governments may not add AV requirements or taxes, and the original maker of a vehicle a third party converts into an AV is not liable.
To allow the operation of a personal delivery device in pedestrian areas and certain streets and roads
Arkansas's Act 926 of 2021 (HB 1767), the Personal Delivery Device Act, authorizes delivery robots: electrically powered cargo devices of up to 500 pounds equipped with automated driving technology that lets them operate with or without a person's active control or monitoring. Devices may travel at up to 10 mph in pedestrian areas and 20 mph on county or city streets, but not on interstates, state highways or roads posted above 45 mph. They must yield to pedestrians, show lights at night and carry the operator's contact and a unique number. Operators need $100,000 of liability insurance per device. Localities may ban devices where unsafe but not regulate their design.
An Act Concerning the State Budget for the Biennium Ending June 30, 2027, and Making Appropriations Therefor, and Provisions Related to Revenue and Other Items Implementing the State Budget
Section 261 of Connecticut's 2025 budget act (Public Act 25-168) creates the crime of unlawful dissemination of an intimate synthetically created image. A synthetically created image is a photo, video or other image not wholly recorded by a camera or partly or wholly computer-generated that is virtually indistinguishable from a real depiction of an identifiable person. It is a crime to intentionally share such an intimate image without consent, knowing it is synthetic, intending viewers to believe it is real, when the person is harmed, or after creating or obtaining it to harm them. Penalties reach a class D felony. Section 261 is effective October 1, 2025.
An Act Establishing a Civil Action for the Office of the Attorney General and a Private Right of Action for Victims of Unlawful Dissemination of a Synthetically Created Intimate Image
Connecticut's HB 5312 (Public Act 26-55) adds civil remedies for AI-made intimate images. A person harmed by unlawful dissemination of a synthetically created intimate image may sue whoever knowingly shared it with intent to harm, for an injunction, damages including punitive damages, and attorney's fees, within two years of discovery. Covered platforms must run a notice-and-removal process for victims and the Attorney General, post plain-language instructions, and remove reported images and reasonable efforts at copies within 48 hours. The Attorney General can seek penalties of up to $25,000 per day. Effective October 1, 2026.
Criminalizing and creating a private right of action for the facilitation, encouragement, offer, solicitation, or recommendation of certain acts or actions through a responsive generative communication to a child
New Hampshire's HB 143 (Chapter 270 of 2025) targets chatbots that steer children toward harm. The owner or operator of an AI chat program, chatbot, character AI or similar service whose sole purpose is open-ended generative conversation commits endangering the welfare of a child if it knowingly directs communications to a child intended to encourage the child to imminently engage in sexually explicit conduct or its depiction, drug or alcohol use, self-harm or suicide, or violence. The same conduct creates civil liability for damages of at least $1,000 per violation, which the Attorney General, who has the sole right of action, enforces after a 90-day cure notice. Effective January 1, 2026.
Unlawful dissemination of an intimate image.
Wyoming's HB 85 (Chapter 85 of 2021) created the crime of unlawfully disseminating an intimate image, and its definition of image includes a computer generated image that purports to represent an identifiable person, so fake or AI-made intimate images count. An adult commits the offense by sharing an intimate image of another person, including on social media, when they knew or should have known the person expected privacy and did not expressly consent, and they intended to humiliate, harm, harass, threaten or coerce, or acted for sexual gratification. It is a misdemeanor punishable by up to one year in jail, a $5,000 fine, or both. Effective July 1, 2021.
Requests a study of the use of facial recognition data by law enforcement
Louisiana's HR 199 is a House resolution, adopted 65-30 on June 10, 2021, that requests the House Committees on Administration of Criminal Justice and on Judiciary to jointly study law enforcement's use of facial recognition data, how it is obtained, and its use in investigations and legal proceedings, taking information from groups including the Department of Justice, police and sheriffs' associations, the ACLU and the NAACP. Their report, due February 1, 2022, was to include search, arrest and conviction statistics and recommendations on legislation to safeguard due process, privacy and civil liberties. As a resolution of one chamber, it does not change the law.
Establishes criteria for the use of automated employment decision tools; provides for enforcement for violations of such criteria.
New York's A 3914 would add Labor Law § 203-g making it unlawful for an employer to use an automated employment decision tool to screen candidates unless a disparate impact analysis is done at least annually, a summary and the tool's distribution date are posted on the employer's website before use, and the summary is provided annually to the Department. The Attorney General or Commissioner could investigate and sue. Would take effect immediately. Referred to the Labor Committee January 30, 2025 and January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
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.
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.
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.
An act relating to consumer data privacy and online surveillance
Vermont's S.71 (Act 145) adds the Vermont Data Privacy and Online Surveillance Act. It covers businesses that in the prior year processed personal data of at least 35,000 Vermonters or sensitive data of at least 3,000, or offered for sale personal data of at least 3,000. Consumers may access, correct, delete and port their data and opt out of targeted ads, sales and profiling for automated decisions with legal or similarly significant effects. Controllers must minimize data, get consent for sensitive data, say whether they use data to train large language models, and assess risky processing and profiling. Attorney General enforcement only. Signed June 16, 2026; effective January 1, 2028.
Regulate artificial intelligence in media and political advertisements under the Nebraska Political Accountability and Disclosure Act
Not law. Nebraska LB1203 (2024), introduced by Senator John Cavanaugh, would have required a clear and conspicuous AI disclosure on paid political ads generated wholly or substantially by AI, and barred knowingly distributing materially deceptive AI media within 90 days before an election with intent to harm a candidate and deceive voters, unless it carried a disclaimer. Remedies were permanent injunctions only. Indefinitely postponed April 18, 2024.
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.
Autonomous Vehicles
Florida's HB 311 lets fully autonomous vehicles operate in Florida whether or not a human operator is in the vehicle, needing no licensed human operator, and deems the automated driving system the operator when engaged. Fully autonomous vehicles must be able to reach a minimal risk condition if the system fails. On-demand autonomous vehicle networks follow transportation network company law, with $1 million primary liability, PIP and uninsured motorist coverage while logged on. Local governments may not impose taxes, fees or other requirements on autonomous vehicles. Approved June 13, 2019 (Chapter 2019-101); effective July 1, 2019.
Law enforcement agencies: facial recognition technology.
California's AB 1814 (2023-24 Regular Session) would add Penal Code section 13661 to bar a law enforcement agency or peace officer from using a facial recognition technology match as the sole basis for probable cause to arrest or search, and bar a judge from granting a warrant application based solely on a match. It passed the Assembly 70-0 but was held under submission in Senate Appropriations on August 15, 2024 and was not passed before the session ended.
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-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.
A bill for an act relating to artificial intelligence, including the use of artificial intelligence to create materials related to elections and protections in interactions with artificial intelligence systems, and making penalties applicable.
Iowa's HSB 294 would require a disclosure on AI-generated election material that advocates for or against a candidate or ballot issue, and would create Code chapter 554I requiring developers and deployers of high-risk AI systems to use reasonable care against algorithmic discrimination, with attorney general enforcement. The House committee voted 18-3 for passage on March 6, 2025; it has not passed either chamber.
A bill for an act relating to chatbots, including deployer requirements and interactions with minors. (Formerly HSB 647.)
Iowa's HF 2715 (formerly HSB 647) would require deployers of AI companions, public-facing chatbots and therapeutic chatbots to keep harm-response and self-harm protocols, disclose at the start and every three hours that the user is talking to AI, and take extra steps for minors. The attorney general could seek civil penalties up to $2,500 per violation. On the House calendar since February 24, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
A bill for an act relating to restrictions on the use of artificial intelligence, and creating a civil cause of action.
Iowa's HF 2082 would bar using artificial intelligence to intentionally recreate a person's audio or visual likeness without consent when the likeness is meant to be nearly indistinguishable from the person and is used commercially, in a political campaign the person does not support, or to deceive, embarrass or induce action. Victims could sue for actual and punitive damages. Referred to the House Economic Growth and Technology Committee January 15, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Creates an artificial intelligence working group within the department of education for the purpose of developing guidance and a model policy on the safe and effective use of artificial intelligence in ways that benefit, and do not harm, pupils and educators.
New York's A 6972 would add Education Law § 115 creating an artificial intelligence working group in the State Education Department, to develop guidance for school districts and charter schools on safe AI use and a model policy, and to report to the Governor and Legislature. The text sets dates of January 1, 2026 for guidance, July 1, 2026 for the model policy and January 1, 2027 for the report. Would take effect immediately and expire January 31, 2031. Introduced March 18, 2025 and referred to the Education Committee (again January 7, 2026); it has not passed either chamber.
Sexually Related Offenses
Florida's CS/CS/SB 1798 (Chapter 2022-212) created s. 836.13, F.S. An altered sexual depiction is an image modified by digital or other means to show a realistic identifiable person with another person's or computer-generated nude body parts, or in sexual conduct they did not engage in. Willfully and maliciously promoting one without consent, knowing it is altered, is a third-degree felony; a disclaimer is no defense. Victims may sue for an injunction, the greater of $10,000 or actual damages, and attorney fees. Effective October 1, 2022.
AN ACT RELATING TO COMMERCIAL LAW -- GENERAL REGULATORY PROVISIONS -- INTERNET ACCESS AND ADVERTISING BY FACSIMILE
Rhode Island H 7543 (2026), as introduced on February 6, 2026, would add section 6-47-2.1 requiring any video, image or photograph generated by artificial intelligence that is posted on a public platform, and is created in or viewable in Rhode Island, to carry a marking disclosing that it was AI-generated. A violation for profit or for trade would be a deceptive trade practice with a civil penalty under 6-13.1-8. The text says it takes effect upon passage.
Psychotherapy Artificial Intelligence Restrictions
Colorado's HB 26-1195 limits how licensed mental health professionals and others lawfully providing psychotherapy use AI. They may use it for administrative and supplementary support (e.g. scheduling, billing) if they stay responsible for reviewing its outputs, but may not let AI engage in therapeutic communication with clients without their synchronous, real-time participation or generate therapeutic recommendations or treatment plans without their approval. AI recording or transcription of sessions needs advance written notice and consent. No one may present AI as psychotherapy, therapist-equivalent or therapist-confidential. Signed June 3, 2026 (Chapter 358); effective August 12, 2026.
Establishes "Authentic Relationships Act"; prohibits artificial intelligence relationship simulation.
New Jersey's A2710 would create the Authentic Relationships Act. Providers could not design, develop, market or make available AI relationship simulations in New Jersey; AI could include features resembling intimate interaction only if used exclusively for a legitimate medical usage and not simulating a romantic or sexual relationship. The Attorney General could assess civil penalties of up to $25,000 per violation, and harmed individuals could sue. Pre-filed for introduction in the 2026 session.
ICE Out of Our Faces Act
The federal H.R. 7363 (ICE Out of Our Faces Act) would make it unlawful for any covered immigration officer (officers, employees, agents and contractors of ICE or CBP and officials deputized under INA section 287(g)) to acquire, possess, access or use in the United States any biometric surveillance system, including facial recognition, or information from one run by another entity. Data collected would have to be deleted within 30 days after enactment. Introduced February 4, 2026 and referred to the House Judiciary and Homeland Security committees (and the Border Security and Enforcement Subcommittee); no further action.
Requires AG to study law enforcement use of facial recognition technology and issue report with recommendations for Statewide policy.
New Jersey's A759 would require the Attorney General to study law enforcement use of facial recognition technology and report to the Governor and Legislature within six months of the bill's effective date, with recommendations for a statewide policy covering State and local law enforcement agencies.
Urges generative artificial intelligence and content sharing platforms to make voluntary commitments to prevent and remove harmful content.
New Jersey's AR101 is a resolution that does not change the law. It would urge generative AI and content sharing platforms to voluntarily commit to preventing and removing harmful deepfake and cheapfake content, and direct the Clerk to send copies to the chief executives of leading AI and content sharing companies in the State.
Prohibits and imposes criminal penalty on disclosure of certain intentionally deceptive audio or visual media within 90 days of election.
New Jersey's S2129 would make it a fourth-degree crime to knowingly or recklessly disclose, or to solicit, intentionally deceptive audio or visual media (deepfakes) within 90 days of an election with intent to deceive a voter with false information; a repeat offense would be third-degree. Voters and depicted candidates could sue, and media carrying a prescribed disclaimer would be excepted.
Prohibits deepfake pornography and imposes criminal and civil penalties for non-consensual disclosure.
New Jersey's S1159 would add 'deceptive audio or visual media' (deepfakes) to the State's invasion-of-privacy law, making it a third-degree crime, with a fine of up to $30,000, to disclose such intimate media of a person without consent, knowing one is not licensed or privileged to do so. It would add such media to the child sexual exploitation offenses and let the person depicted sue.
Requires artificial intelligence companion operators to provide notifications that users are not communicating with human.
New Jersey's A4732 would require operators of AI companions, meaning generative AI systems designed to simulate a sustained human or human-like relationship, to tell users they are not talking to a human. The notice must come at the start of each interaction and repeat at least every three hours. The penalty would be $15,000 per violation. This describes the bill as introduced March 10, 2026; later committee amendments, if any, are not reflected.
Artificial Intelligence Transparency Act; established.
Virginia's HB 2554 (2025 Regular Session) would have created the Artificial Intelligence Transparency Act, requiring developers of generative AI systems that produce audio, images, text or video to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure on AI-generated content and to prevent downstream use without it. Left in committee on February 4, 2025; it failed.
Prohibits use and sale of algorithmic devices for setting rent price or occupancy of residential dwelling units.
New Jersey's A2299 would make it unlawful to sell, license or provide landlords with an 'algorithmic device' that sets or recommends rents or occupancy rates for residential units, and unlawful for landlords to use one. The Attorney General could sue for damages, injunctions and civil penalties of up to $1,000 per violation.
Includes communications generated using artificial intelligence in the definition of falsely reporting an incident in the third degree.
New York's A 9185 would amend Penal Law § 240.50 (falsely reporting an incident in the third degree) so that each of its four types of false report, including false reports of crimes, emergencies, offenses to law enforcement, and child or vulnerable-person abuse to central registers, expressly covers reports made "including using artificial intelligence or generative artificial intelligence," as defined in General Business Law § 1700. The offense stays a class A misdemeanor. Would take effect immediately. Introduced October 17, 2025 and referred to the Codes Committee (again January 7, 2026); it has not passed either chamber.
Clarifies that owners of self-driving motor vehicles must comply with existing insurance requirements.
New Jersey's A1639 would extend the State's compulsory automobile liability insurance requirement and the no-fault Automobile Reparation Reform Act to self-driving motor vehicles of any SAE automation level, so their owners would have to carry the same insurance as other vehicle owners.
Provides civil penalties for campaign advertisements containing "deepfake" misrepresentations of candidates.
New Jersey's A4163 would make a covered person liable for fraudulent misrepresentation of a candidate if they knowingly and intentionally disseminate a campaign advertisement containing a deepfake of that candidate, unless it carries a prescribed disclosure and embedded content provenance. A candidate could sue for punitive damages and daily civil penalties of up to $15,000, $50,000 or $250,000 by office. Introduced February 19, 2026.
Prohibits deepfake pornography and imposes criminal and civil penalties for non-consensual disclosure.
New Jersey's A1359 would add 'deceptive audio or visual media' (deepfakes) to the State's invasion-of-privacy law, making it a third-degree crime, with a fine of up to $30,000, to disclose such intimate media of a person without consent, knowing one is not licensed or privileged to do so. It would add such media to the child sexual exploitation offenses and let the person depicted sue.
Updates certain crimes to include nonconsensual pornographic deepfake threats and disclosure.
New Jersey's S3303 would amend the invasion of privacy and criminal coercion laws to cover deepfakes. Knowingly reproducing, without license or privilege, an actual or deepfake image of another person's exposed intimate parts or sexual activity without consent would be a third-degree crime; disclosing such a deepfake image knowingly or with reckless disregard of license would be fourth degree with a fine of up to $30,000; threatening to disclose one would count as criminal coercion. Introduced February 2, 2026.
Requires AG to study use of artificial intelligence for certain law enforcement purposes and issue report.
New Jersey's A3076 would require the Attorney General to study how law enforcement agencies use AI to generate police reports and report to the Governor and Legislature within six months of the act's effective date, with recommendations for a Statewide policy. The text reviewed is the pre-filed version.
"AI Likeness Protection Act"; concerns distributing realistic representation of individual's image, likeness, or voice created using generative artificial intelligence.
New Jersey's A5088, the AI Likeness Protection Act, would require a person to get consent from an individual (or a minor's parent or guardian) before publishing or distributing a highly realistic generative-AI representation of that person's voice or likeness. The individual could sue for an injunction and the greater of actual damages plus profits or a civil penalty of up to $1,000 per violation. Introduced May 14, 2026.
Providing for the use of artificial intelligence in mental health therapy and for enforcement.
Pennsylvania's HB 1993 (2025-26), the Artificial Intelligence in Mental Health Therapy Act, would bar mental health professionals from using AI to support recorded or transcribed therapy sessions without written notice and patient consent, bar AI providers from representing that an AI system can provide therapy or is a therapist, and bar AI from making independent therapeutic decisions. It was referred to the House Professional Licensure Committee on October 24, 2025.
In culpability, providing for liability for deployment of artificial intelligence system.
Pennsylvania's HB 1533 (2025-26) would add 18 Pa.C.S. 306.1, making a person who deploys an AI system to perform an automated or autonomous function subject to criminal or civil liability, or both, for any negative outcome from the deployment. Claims that the AI acted autonomously or was supplied by a third party would not avoid liability. It was referred to the House Judiciary Committee on May 30, 2025.
Urging the United States Congress to suspend any and all efforts to pass Federal legislation that would impose a moratorium on state-level artificial intelligence regulation; recognizing the potential benefits along with the risks of misuse and systemic harm of artificial intelligence…
Pennsylvania's HR 425 (2025-26) is a House resolution, so it does not change the law. It urges Congress to suspend efforts to pass federal legislation imposing a moratorium on state-level AI regulation, affirms the General Assembly's authority to legislate on AI, and urges the President and Justice Department to cease threats of legal action or broadband funding limits against state AI laws. The House adopted it 131-72 on September 30, 2026.
Providing for safety regarding artificial intelligence in companionship applications; and imposing a penalty.
Pennsylvania's HB 2006 (2025-26), the AI Companion Safety Act (Printer's No. 3747), would bar an operator from providing an AI companion unless it implements and maintains protocols that refer users to crisis services and block content that assists or encourages suicide or violence, and would require nonhuman-status disclosures. The bill also imposes a penalty (the penalty text was not captured). It passed the House 133-70 on September 28, 2026.
Prohibits the provision of an artificial intelligence companion to a user unless such artificial intelligence companion contains a protocol for addressing possible suicidal ideation or self-harm expressed by a user, possible physical harm to others expressed by a user, and possible financial harm…
New York's A 6767 would add General Business Law Article 47 and make it unlawful for an operator to provide an AI companion unless it has a protocol for possible suicidal ideation or self-harm, physical harm to others, and financial harm to others expressed by a user, including a crisis-service referral. Operators would also have to tell users, at the start and at least every three hours, that the companion is not human. The Assembly passed it March 25, 2025, but it died in the Senate and was returned to the Assembly January 7, 2026, where it was ordered to third reading (Cal. 175); it has not passed again.
Enacts the "Shirley Myers White Right To Reconciliation and Digital Identity Repair Act"; establishes a right for individuals to have outdated, inaccurate, or incomplete public and digital narratives corrected once a legal matter is resolved; requires institutions to provide mechanisms for context…
New York's A 10909, the "Shirley Myers White Right To Reconciliation and Digital Identity Repair Act," would add Executive Law § 296-e giving individuals a right to have outdated, inaccurate or incomplete narratives corrected after a legal matter is resolved. Among its domains, entities using automated tools for screening, ranking or decision-making would have to give notice when adverse decisions rely on automated narrative sources, allow correction, and ensure human review when narrative harm is alleged. Referred to the Governmental Operations Committee April 8, 2026; it has not passed either house.
Imposes liability for damages caused by a chatbot impersonating certain licensed professionals
New York's S 7263-A would add General Business Law § 390-f. A chatbot operator could not knowingly let its chatbot impersonate a licensed professional (a profession licensed under listed Education Law articles, or an attorney) in a way that would be a crime or unauthorized practice if done by a person, and could not disclaim liability with a not-human notice. Operators would also have to give clear notice that users are talking to an AI chatbot. The Attorney General could seek up to $15,000 per day. Reported by the Internet and Technology Committee and advanced to third reading, amended May 26, 2026 and committed to Rules June 5, 2026; no chamber has passed it.
Establishes Deep Fake Technology Unit in DLPS; appropriates $2 million.
New Jersey's S 2130 (as introduced) would have the Attorney General, consulting the state Chief Technology Officer, establish a Deep Fake Technology Unit in the Division of Criminal Justice to give State and local law enforcement, prosecutors and courts technical assistance, expertise and training on deceptive audio or visual media, including analyzing evidence and giving expert testimony. The unit would issue annual reports beginning one year after it forms, and $2 million would be appropriated from the General Fund. Introduced January 13, 2026 and referred to the Senate Law and Public Safety Committee; it has not passed either house.
An act relating to the regulation of chatbots
Vermont's H.784 (2026) would have regulated chatbot providers under a new 9 V.S.A. chapter 118. Providers could not use chat logs for targeted ads, sell chat logs, train on minors' data, or train on adults without affirmative consent, and would have had to disclose the chatbot is not human at the first output and hourly, assess risks monthly, and publish information. Chatbots would be products with provider liability. The Attorney General or a State's Attorney could sue, and users could recover $5,000 liquidated damages. Referred to committee January 27, 2026; died.
Enacts the New York Artificial Intelligence Civil Rights Act establishing protections for individual rights with respect to computational algorithms; establishes protections against the use of algorithms involved in consequential decisions, such as those that impact people's rights, civil…
New York's A 9654 (the New York Artificial Intelligence Civil Rights Act) would bar developers and deployers from using covered algorithms in consequential actions (such as employment, housing, credit, health care, insurance, education, criminal justice and government services) in ways that discriminate or have a disparate impact on protected characteristics. It would require independent audits where harm is plausible. Referred to the Assembly Science and Technology Committee January 21, 2026; it has not passed either house.
Video Surveillance
South Carolina's H 4675 would create the Community Data Protection and Responsible Surveillance Act. State and local law enforcement could not use surveillance systems (automated license plate readers) that store data on third-party servers or use AI to identify or track vehicles by appearance. Data would be kept at most 21 days and searched only with a warrant. Referred to the House Judiciary Committee January 13, 2026; it has not passed either house.
AGE-APPROPRIATE DESIGN CODE
Illinois' SB 51 is mainly a children's online privacy and design-code bill. As introduced, it would require a business whose online service, product, or feature is likely to be accessed by people under 18 to complete a data protection impact assessment, which must address whether the service's algorithms and targeted advertising systems could harm children, and would bar profiling a child by default. Attorney General enforcement only. Introduced January 13, 2025; re-referred to Assignments April 11, 2025 and still pending.
Relating To Artificial Intelligence.
Hawaii's HB 1734 (2024) would have required campaign advertisements containing an image, video or audio created wholly or partly with generative AI to include a clear and conspicuous disclosure, with format rules by media type (printed box for images, at least three seconds for audio, at least four seconds for video). Violators would face a fine under HRS 11-410. It was referred to JHA and FIN on January 24, 2024 and died when the 2024 session ended.
Establishes "Authentic Relationships Act"; prohibits artificial intelligence relationship simulation.
New Jersey's A6246 (Authentic Relationships Act) would have barred providers from offering in the state any AI relationship simulation, meaning software or a device designed or marketed to imitate or encourage an intimate, romantic or sexual relationship between a person and AI. Supervised medical uses that do not simulate romance were exempt. The Attorney General could seek up to $25,000 per violation, harmed individuals could sue, and deceiving a person into thinking they were talking to a human would have violated the consumer fraud act. It died in committee when the 2024-2025 session ended.
Trade: business regulation; requirements and safety standards for developers of certain artificial intelligence models; provide for. Creates new act.
Michigan's HB 4668 (as introduced) would create the Artificial Intelligence Safety and Security Transparency Act. Large developers of foundation models (compute costing at least $5 million for one model and $100 million over 12 months) would have to publish a safety and security protocol for critical risks, publish transparency reports at least every 90 days, and get an annual third-party audit, with whistleblower protection. The attorney general could seek fines up to $1,000,000 per violation. Re-referred to the House Communications and Technology Committee March 19, 2026; it has not passed either house.
A bill for an act relating to automated decision systems used by employers.
Iowa's SF 2414 would create Code chapter 91F requiring employers to give employees advance written notice of automated decision systems used for employment decisions, bar sole reliance on them for discipline, termination or deactivation, and give employees access to their data. The Department of Inspections, Appeals, and Licensing could enforce with a $500 civil penalty. Referred to Senate Workforce February 19, 2026; subcommittee named February 23, 2026.
Relating To Algorithmic Discrimination.
Hawaii's SB 2524 (2024) would have added an Algorithmic Discrimination chapter. Covered entities (those holding data on more than 25,000 residents, over $15,000,000 in receipts, data brokers, or service providers) could not use algorithmic processes using machine learning, AI or similar techniques to decide eligibility for credit, insurance, education, employment, housing or public accommodations in a discriminatory way, and would owe notices, annual audits and reports. Penalties up to $10,000 per violation, plus private suits. It was referred to committees January 24, 2024. It died.
Concerning regulation of artificial intelligence companion chatbots.
Washington's AI companion chatbot law (Chapter 168, Laws of 2026, effective January 1, 2027). Operators must clearly disclose that the companion is AI and not human at the start of an interaction and at least every three hours, and stop it from claiming to be human. For known minors or minor-directed bots the notice is hourly, sexually explicit content is blocked and manipulative engagement (romantic bonding, guilt when leaving, isolation, secrecy, pay-to-stay) is prohibited. Every operator needs a published suicide and self-harm protocol with crisis referrals and yearly referral counts. Violations are unfair or deceptive acts under the Consumer Protection Act.
Synthetic digital representations and providing a penalty.
Wisconsin's AB 855 (2025-26) would have created s. 942.085 making it a Class A misdemeanor to create and post, publish, distribute or exhibit a "synthetic digital representation" of an individual with intent to coerce, harass or intimidate, and a Class I felony to do so with intent to defraud, coerce or intimidate for monetary gain. Introduced January 16, 2026, it failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1 on March 23, 2026.
A BILL for an Act to provide for a department of transportation study regarding autonomous and semiautonomous vehicle technologies; and to provide a legislative management report.
North Dakota's HB 1614 (2025), as engrossed, would have required the Department of Transportation to study autonomous and semiautonomous vehicle technologies during the 2025-26 interim, covering infrastructure readiness, review of accident and traffic data, accident liability rules, and privacy and data-security vulnerabilities, and to report to legislative management before August 1, 2026. The House passed it 84-9 on February 24, 2025, but the Senate defeated it 2-43 on March 31, 2025, so it died.
Relative to prohibiting certain uses of deepfakes and creating a private claim of action
New Hampshire's HB 1432 (Chapter 243 of 2024) makes fraudulent use of deepfakes a class B felony. A deepfake is video, audio or other media in which a person's face, body or voice has been digitally altered so they appear to be someone else or to say or do something they never did. Knowingly creating, distributing or presenting a deepfake of an identifiable person to embarrass, harass, entrap, defame, extort or cause financial or reputational harm is a crime, and a deepfake that leads to the person's arrest is a separate felony carrying liability for their defense costs. Victims may also sue for damages. News, satire and parody are excepted. Effective January 1, 2025.
Eavesdropping, Peeping, and Voyeurism
South Carolina's H 3042 would amend Section 16-17-470 on eavesdropping, peeping and voyeurism. It would add voyeurism by creating, with generative adversarial network techniques or other digital technology, a realistic but false image, audio or video of another person for sexual gratification, and cover selling or distributing such material. It also raises penalties. Introduced January 14, 2025 and referred to the House Judiciary Committee; it has not passed either chamber.
Urging The Leadership Of The Department Of Law Enforcement To Periodically Undergo Training On Crimes Relating To Artificial Intelligence Technology.
Hawaii's House Resolution 48 (2024) would have urged the Director, Deputy Directors and Administrators of the Department of Law Enforcement to complete training on crimes involving artificial intelligence, including deepfakes and related technologies, at least every two years. It was offered March 7 and referred to the House JHA and FIN committees on March 8, 2024, and was never adopted. A resolution does not change the law.
Distribution of Intimate Images
South Carolina's S 72 would add Sections 16-15-330, 16-15-332 and 16-15-333 making it a felony to intentionally disseminate an intimate image or a digitally forged intimate image, including one generated or substantially modified with machine-learning techniques, without the depicted person's effective consent. A first offense carries a fine up to $5,000 or up to five years' imprisonment. Introduced January 14, 2025 and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee; it has not passed either chamber.
Urging The Leadership Of The Department Of Law Enforcement To Periodically Undergo Training On Crimes Relating To Artificial Intelligence Technology.
Hawaii's House Concurrent Resolution 65 (2024) would have urged the Director, Deputy Directors and Administrators of the Department of Law Enforcement to train on crimes relating to artificial intelligence, including deepfakes, at least every two years. It was referred to House committees on March 8, 2024 and never adopted; it died at the end of the biennium. A resolution does not change the law.
Artificial Intelligence
Not law: died in subcommittee. Florida's HB 1395 (2026) would have created an "Artificial Intelligence Bill of Rights" (new part IX of ch. 501): parental consent and controls for minors on companion chatbot platforms, an hourly not-human pop-up for bots, a ban on selling users' personal information unless deidentified, and consent for commercial use of generative-AI likenesses. It would also have barred government AI contracts with foreign-country-of-concern entities. It died on March 13, 2026.
An Act to prohibit the use of a deepfake to influence an election and to provide a penalty therefor.
South Dakota's 2025 SB 164 targets election deepfakes. A deepfake is an image, audio or video created or manipulated with AI or other digital technology so realistic that a reasonable person would believe it shows a real person's speech or conduct that did not happen. Disseminating one, or contracting to, with intent to injure a candidate within 90 days of an election, without the disclosure "This (image/video/audio) has been manipulated or generated by artificial intelligence," is a Class 1 misdemeanor. The AG, candidates and depicted people can sue. The act states no effective date.
Political campaign advertisements; synthetic media, penalty.
Virginia's SB 141 (2026 Regular Session) would have required electioneering communications with synthetic media to carry a conspicuous statement, with a civil penalty up to $25,000 and a Class 1 misdemeanor for willful violations. It passed the Senate 34-4; the House substituted different text, and the bill failed in conference on March 14, 2026.
Eyewitness Identification
Not law: died in committee. Florida's SB 1202 would have amended s. 92.70, F.S., on eyewitness identification: officers would have had to record the eyewitness's description in the offense report, use lineups with the suspect and at least five fillers, make efforts to use a lineup instead of a show-up, and record procedures on audio and video. If facial recognition technology identified a suspect, a lineup could not be held unless there was a basis independent of the facial recognition result. It died in Criminal Justice on March 13, 2026.
Transportation
Not law: died in committee. Florida's CS/SB 1274 was a broad transportation bill. Its AI-related part would have amended s. 339.85 to create the Next-generation Traffic Signal Modernization Grant Program for signals with "artificial intelligence- and machine learning-enabled" detection, controllers, communications and software, with $20 million a year from FY 2026-2027. It also would have allowed private license plate recognition systems on property the entity owns or controls. It died in Appropriations on March 13, 2026; companion SB 488 became Chapter 2026-39, but its enrolled text has neither provision.
Relating To Algorithmic Discrimination.
Hawaii's HB 1607 (2024) would have added an Algorithmic Discrimination chapter. Covered entities (those holding data on more than 25,000 residents, over $15,000,000 in receipts, data brokers, or service providers) could not use algorithmic processes using machine learning, AI or similar techniques to decide eligibility for credit, insurance, education, employment, housing or public accommodations in a discriminatory way, and would owe notices, annual audits and reports. Penalties up to $10,000 per violation, plus private suits. It was referred to HET and JHA January 24, 2024. It died.
Protecting Children from Chatbots
South Carolina's H 5476, the Protecting Children from Chatbots Act (new Chapter 81 of Title 39), would require chatbot operators with 500,000 or more monthly active users to offer a limited-access mode, verify users' ages and obtain verifiable parental consent before minors use restricted features. The Attorney General could seek civil penalties of up to $50,000 per violation. Introduced March 31, 2026 and referred to the House Judiciary Committee; it has not passed either chamber.
TRANSPARENCY IN DOWNCODING ACT
Illinois's HB 4735 (104th General Assembly) would create the Transparency in Downcoding Act for certain health insurance policies. A health insurance issuer could not use an automated process, system or tool to downcode a claim, or downcode based solely on reported diagnosis codes, and downcoding decisions would have to be made by a licensed physician. Re-referred to the House Rules Committee March 27, 2026.
Digital Content Authenticity and Transparency Act; established, civil penalty.
Virginia's HB 2121 (2025 Regular Session) would have created the Digital Content Authenticity and Transparency Act, requiring generative AI developers to apply provenance data to synthetic content and offer a public provenance tool and reader, with Attorney General enforcement and civil penalties. Left in committee on February 4, 2025; it failed.
Unauthorized use of name, portrait, etc.; digital replica, civil liability, statute of limitations.
Virginia's HB 2462 (2025 Regular Session) would have amended Code § 8.01-40 to extend the suit for unauthorized use of a person's name, portrait or picture to voice and likeness, and created civil liability for unauthorized digital replicas in expressive audiovisual works or sound recordings made without written consent. The Senate version also made platforms liable for failing to promptly remove a replica after notice. The chambers passed different versions and the bill failed in conference on February 22, 2025.
Synthetic media; expands applicability of provisions related to defamation, etc., penalty.
Virginia's SB 571 (2024 Regular Session) would have extended defamation, slander and libel provisions to synthetic media and made it a Class 1 misdemeanor to generate, create or use deceptive audio or visual media to commit a fraud offense, with a rebuttable presumption, a civil action for the person depicted and an Attorney General work group. Continued to 2025 in committee on February 12, 2024; it failed.
Provides that a person may operate a fully autonomous vehicle on the public roads of this state without a human driver provided that the automated driving system is engaged and the vehicle meets certain conditions; defines terms; requires insurance and that such vehicle is registered as a fully…
New York's A 4901-B (same as S 344-B) would add Article 34-E to the Vehicle and Traffic Law, letting a person operate a fully autonomous vehicle (gross vehicle weight rating of 10,000 pounds or less) on public roads without a human driver if the automated driving system is engaged and the vehicle can reach a minimal risk condition after a system failure. Operators would need to file insurance proof and a law enforcement interaction plan, and registration and title would be marked as fully autonomous. Referred to the Transportation Committee; amended and recommitted April 24, 2026. It has not passed either chamber.
License artificial intelligence risk mitigation organizations
Ohio's HB 628 would enact chapter 3755 letting the Attorney General license independent verification organizations that assess whether AI models and applications meet standards for preventing personal injury and property damage. An applicant would file a plan with its risk-mitigation metrics, requirements for developers and deployers, and independence safeguards, and could be licensed only if independent of the AI industry. An AI safety advisory council would be set up in the Attorney General's office. Referred to committee February 4, 2026.
CONSUMER DATA PRIVACY ACT
Illinois's SB 3548 (104th General Assembly) would create the Consumer Data Privacy Act, giving consumers rights to confirm whether personal data is processed, correct and delete it, obtain a copy, and opt out of targeted advertising, data sales or profiling. It would apply to persons controlling or processing data of at least 100,000 consumers, with Attorney General enforcement. Last action: re-referred to Assignments May 22, 2026.
AGE-APPROPRIATE DESIGN CODE
Illinois' SB 3241 is mainly a children's online privacy and design-code bill. As introduced, it would require covered entities (for-profit businesses over set revenue or data thresholds) to complete data protection impact assessments for services reasonably likely to be accessed by children, including whether algorithms and targeted advertising systems could harm children, and would bar profiling a child by default. Introduced February 2, 2026; re-referred to Assignments May 22, 2026.
Relating to disclosures and penalties associated with use of synthetic media and artificial intelligence
West Virginia's SB 484 (2025 regular session, committee substitute) would have added W. Va. Code 3-8-12a barring anyone from distributing, or agreeing to distribute, AI-manipulated synthetic media of a person within 90 days before an election, knowing it is false, without consent and intending to injure a candidate or influence the result, unless it carries a clear disclaimer. It would be a misdemeanor with a fine up to $1,000 per violation, plus civil actions. It passed no chamber: it was laid over on first reading and referred to Rules on March 4, 2025.
Relates to the use of artificial intelligence by insurers and clinical peer reviewers for utilization review; establishes additional notice requirements for adverse determinations.
New York's A 11048 would add Insurance Law § 338 on AI-based algorithms in utilization review. Insurers would have to notify insureds, enrollees and providers of AI use, submit their algorithms and training data to the Superintendent with a certification, and could not use AI as the sole basis to deny, delay or modify care. Fines of up to $5,000 per violation ($10,000 if willful) would apply. Introduced April 24, 2026 and referred to the Insurance Committee; it has not passed either chamber.
Relating To Artificial Intelligence.
Hawaii's SB 3001 (Artificial Intelligence Disclosure and Safety Act) regulates AI companions, AI built to simulate a sustained human-like relationship. Operators must disclose it is AI if a reasonable person would think it human, adopt a suicide/self-harm crisis-referral protocol and not program it to claim to give professional mental or behavioral health care. For known or reasonably certain minors they must flag AI use, avoid unpredictable engagement rewards, guard against sexual content and offer screen-time tools. Annual Department of Health reports begin January 1, 2028. Violations are unfair or deceptive acts (HRS § 480-2); no private right of action. Act 248; effective July 14, 2026.
Artificial Intelligence Consumer Protection Amendments
Utah's SB 226 replaces the 2024 generative AI disclosure rules with Utah Code Title 13, Chapter 75. A supplier using generative AI with an individual in a consumer transaction must disclose it is AI, not a human, if the individual clearly asks. Regulated professionals must prominently disclose generative AI at the start of high-risk interactions (collecting health, financial or biometric data, or personalized financial, legal, medical or mental health advice). AI that discloses itself at the outset and throughout gets a safe harbor. Fines up to $2,500 per violation. Signed March 27, 2025; effective May 7, 2025.
Unauthorized Artificial Intelligence Impersonation Amendments
Utah's SB 271 extends the state's abuse-of-personal-identity law (Utah Code Title 45, Chapter 3) to AI. Personal identity now covers name, picture, video likeness, voice and audiovisual appearance, including recreations made with generative AI or digital manipulation. Using it without consent in content for advertising, fundraising or sales in a way that implies endorsement, is likely to confuse or falsely suggests participation is abuse, as is knowingly selling or licensing a tool whose primary purpose is unauthorized commercial use of personal identity. Victims may sue for injunctions, damages, exemplary damages and fees. Signed March 27, 2025; effective May 7, 2025.
Health care services: artificial intelligence.
Vetoed. AB 2575 would have barred California employers from retaliating against workers providing direct patient care based solely on their override of, or reliance on, a clinical decision support system (AI that aids decisions on timing of care, diagnosis or treatment), with enforcement by the Labor Commissioner. In lawsuits over harm from such a system, its developer or deployer could not have argued that a clinician's failure to override it cut off liability. Governor Newsom vetoed it on September 30, 2026, saying its anti-retaliation test set a higher bar than other protections and would make the Labor Commissioner judge the medical standard of care.
Concerning Artificial Intelligence, Algorithms, And Other Automated Technologies; And To Regulate Certain Practices Of Healthcare Insurers.
Arkansas HB 1297 (2025), as engrossed, would have added a subchapter (Ark. Code §§ 23-63-2101 to 2113) regulating healthcare insurers' use of AI and automated decision-making in utilization review. Insurers would have had to disclose algorithm details from January 1, 2026, give explanations for AI-supported denials, and have a clinician licensed in Arkansas review adverse prior authorization determinations. The Insurance Commissioner could fine up to $25,000 per determination. The author withdrew it on April 1, 2025.
STATE GOVT-GENERAL MANDATES
Illinois' Public Act 103-0101 (HB 3902), the Drones as First Responders Act, amends the Freedom from Drone Surveillance Act to let police use drones for search and rescue, infrastructure inspections, demonstrations, dispatched emergency calls and some government-hosted events. Police may not use onboard facial recognition in flight and may run drone data through facial recognition only to counter a terrorist risk found by the Homeland Security Secretary or on reasonable suspicion that swift action is needed to prevent imminent harm, escape or evidence destruction. Drones may not be armed. It revises data retention and adds Attorney General enforcement. Approved and effective June 16, 2023.
Relating To Privacy.
Hawaii's SB 309 (Act 59 of 2021) adds sexual deep fakes to the felony of violation of privacy in the first degree (HRS § 711-1110.9). A person commits it by intentionally creating, disclosing or threatening to disclose an image or video of a composite fictitious person shown nude or engaged in sexual conduct that includes a known person's recognizable physical characteristics, so it appears to depict that person, with intent to substantially harm them or as revenge or retribution. The public-nudity and commercial-transaction exemptions do not apply to it. It is a class C felony. Became Act 59 June 23, 2021; effective on approval.
Schools; creating the Oklahoma Responsible Technology in Schools Act; requiring development of guidance for use of artificial intelligence and emerging technologies. Effective date. Emergency.
Oklahoma's Responsible Technology in Schools Act sets rules for AI in public schools from July 1, 2026. Classroom AI must be educator-directed, with a person reviewing AI outputs before use; AI may not be the main basis for grading, discipline, placement or other high-stakes decisions; and tools must suit students' ages and follow student-privacy law such as FERPA. Districts must give parents a yearly written list of AI tools, vendors and student data shared, and let them opt students out of student-facing AI without penalty. Each district board must adopt an AI policy before the 2027-28 school year.
An Act To Amend Title 15 Of The Delaware Code Relating To Deep Fakes In Elections.
Delaware's HB 316 (enacted as House Substitute 1, 84 Del. Laws c. 487) makes it a crime to distribute, or contract to distribute, a deep fake of a candidate or party within 90 days before an election without the depicted person's consent, if the person knows or should know it is a deep fake. Media carrying "This (image/video/audio) has been altered or artificially generated." is exempt, as are qualifying news coverage, satire and parody. Violations are class B misdemeanors, or class A with intent to cause violence or within 5 years of a prior conviction; depicted candidates may sue in the Court of Chancery. Signed and effective October 9, 2024.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 55, Chapter 30 and Title 55, Chapter 8, relative to autonomous vehicles.
Tennessee's HB 2302 was enacted as its Senate companion, SB 2253 (Public Chapter 726), which the House substituted for it on March 23, 2026. The law amends Tenn. Code § 55-8-202 so a state or local law enforcement agency may adopt a policy for enforcing traffic offenses committed by an automated driving system (ADS). Under such a policy, when a POST-certified or state-commissioned officer finds an ADS committed an offense, the notice or citation goes by first-class mail to the vehicle's registered owner within 20 business days, allows 30 days to pay, and no added costs may be charged without a second notice. Signed April 13, 2026 (Public Chapter 726); effective on signing.
A bill for an act establishing requirements and guidelines for conversational AI services, and providing civil penalties, and including applicability provisions. (Formerly SSB 3011.) Effective date: 07/01/2026. Applicability date: 07/01/2027.
Iowa's SF 2417 (Iowa Code ch. 554J) covers public conversational AI services built mainly to simulate human conversation. For known minors, operators must disclose AI use, take reasonable measures against sexual content and human-like claims, not give rewards at unpredictable intervals to boost engagement, and offer privacy tools. If a reasonable user would think it is human, it must say it is AI. Operators need self-harm crisis-referral protocols and may not knowingly and intentionally program it to claim licensed mental health care. AG enforces: the greater of actual damages or $1,000 per violation (penalty capped at $500,000). Signed May 2, 2026 (Acts Chapter 1068); applies July 1, 2027.
Makes various changes relating to health. (BDR 34-674)
Nevada's AB 406 bars public schools from using AI to perform school counselors', psychologists' and social workers' functions relating to pupils' mental health, and has the Department of Education develop a policy for AI use by staff providing those services. AI providers may not offer AI systems in Nevada specifically programmed to provide what would be professional mental or behavioral health care if done by a person, or claim an AI system can provide such care; civil penalty up to $15,000 per violation. Licensed providers may not use AI in giving care directly to patients, except for administrative support. Approved June 5, 2025 (Chapter 283); effective July 1, 2025.
Revises provisions relating to transportation network companies. (BDR 58-935)
Nevada's SB 288 lets a transportation network company (TNC) contract with monitored autonomous vehicle providers, who own and operate autonomous vehicles with an employed monitor physically present at all times, to give rides through the TNC's app largely on the same terms as drivers. Providers are liable in tort like drivers and must carry at least $1,500,000 of TNC insurance while operating; the TNC must hold a Transportation Authority permit and inspect the vehicles. Local governments generally may not tax or charge fees on these providers or rides. Approved June 10, 2021 (Chapter 550); effective on approval.
PUBLICITY ACT-USE OF AI
Illinois' Public Act 103-0836 (HB 4875) amends the Right of Publicity Act. A person may not knowingly distribute, transmit or make available to the general public a sound recording or audiovisual work with actual knowledge that it contains an unauthorized digital replica: an imitation of a real person's voice, image or likeness made with AI or other technology and used without consent. Facilitators with actual knowledge may also be liable, subject to a notice-and-takedown safe harbor for hosts and cloud providers. Artists' exclusive labels and exclusive distribution licensees may also enforce. News, commentary and parody uses are exempt. Approved August 9, 2024; effective January 1, 2025.
Election communications; deepfakes; prohibition
Arizona's SB 1359 adds A.R.S. § 16-1023. Within 90 days before an election in which a candidate is on the ballot, a creator may not create and distribute synthetic media that the person knows is a deceptive and fraudulent deepfake of that candidate unless it includes a clear and conspicuous disclosure conveying to a reasonable person that the media includes content generated by artificial intelligence. A person who fails to disclose is liable for the civil penalty in § 16-937(B) for each day the deepfake is distributed. Satire, parody and interactive computer services are exempt. Signed May 29, 2024 (Chapter 199).
artificial intelligence; state agencies; rules
Vetoed. Arizona's HB 2592 (2026) would have added A.R.S. § 18-105, requiring the Department of Administration director to have each state budget unit identify AI uses that reduce administrative burdens, eliminate regulations that unnecessarily restrict AI innovation, streamline AI procurement and set up enterprise AI governance. Agencies could not have adopted rules specifically regulating AI systems or computational resources without an express legislative delegation to address a specific harm and a least-restrictive-means showing. The director would have reported yearly by December 1. Vetoed June 19, 2026.
relative to the regulation of artificial intelligence technologies.
New Hampshire's HB 1725 (2026) would have created RSA chapter 359-V, "Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance": a 7-member AI council, AI interaction disclosures, bans on AI developed with intent to unlawfully discriminate or for social scoring, limits on government biometric identification, a regulatory sandbox, and attorney general enforcement with civil penalties. The House voted it Inexpedient to Legislate on February 19, 2026, and it died.
Provides that a person may operate a fully autonomous vehicle on the public roads of this state without a human driver provided that the automated driving system is engaged and the vehicle meets certain conditions; defines terms; requires insurance and that such vehicle is registered as a fully…
New York's A 539-B (2023-2024) would have added Vehicle and Traffic Law Article 34-E allowing a person to operate a fully autonomous vehicle (SAE Level 4 or 5) on public roads without a human driver if the automated driving system is engaged, the vehicle can reach a minimal risk condition after a failure, a law enforcement interaction plan is filed and proof of insurance under VTL Article 6 is submitted. A city of five million or more could set local rules for for-hire services. The enacting clause was stricken July 22, 2024; the bill died with the 2023-2024 session.
Relating to the crime of corrupt political advertising; regulating the use; of generative artificial intelligence; requiring disclosure that an image or speech has been manipulated ; making it a crime to create false representations of candidates in campaign media or of state officials; providing…
Not law. Kansas HB 2559, as amended by the House Elections Committee, would have barred using synthetic media (realistic but false media intentionally manipulated with generative AI) to alter a candidate's appearance, action or speech in election campaign communications and a state official's in any communication. Violations would have been class C misdemeanors, with an affirmative defense if the communication states 'This (image/video/audio) has been manipulated.' Liability for disclosures would have rested solely with the advertiser, not broadcasters or media platforms. The committee recommended it as amended February 12, 2024; it was stricken from the House calendar February 23, 2024.
AI Fraud Deterrence Act
The federal H.R. 6306 (AI Fraud Deterrence Act) would add higher criminal penalties when mail fraud, wire fraud, bank fraud or money laundering is committed with the assistance of artificial intelligence, and would add a penalty of a fine of not more than $1,000,000 or imprisonment of not more than 3 years, or both, for impersonating a federal officer or employee with AI assistance. A rule of construction would protect satire, parody and other expressive conduct that clearly discloses it is not authentic. Introduced November 25, 2025 and referred to the House Judiciary Committee; no further action.
Law-enforcement agencies & sheriff's dept.; policy on use of covered artificial intelligence syst.
Virginia's HB 1170 (2026 Regular Session) would have required the Department of Criminal Justice Services to set a model policy for law-enforcement use of covered AI systems by October 1, 2026, and local agencies, sheriffs and State Police to adopt policies meeting it by January 1, 2027. It failed: tabled in House committee February 2, 2026.
Prohibits and imposes criminal penalty on disclosure of certain intentionally deceptive audio or visual media within 90 days of election.
New Jersey's A3585 would make it a fourth-degree crime to knowingly or recklessly disclose, or to solicit, intentionally deceptive audio or visual media (deepfakes) within 90 days of an election with intent to deceive a voter with false information; a repeat offense would be third-degree. Voters and depicted candidates could sue, and media carrying a prescribed disclaimer would be excepted.
Mississippi Medical Judgement Protection Act; create.
Mississippi's HB 1717 (2026), the Mississippi Medical Judgment Protection Act, would require a provider or facility whose clinical AI materially contributes to a diagnosis, treatment plan, order or clinical note to disclose that in the medical record and have a licensed clinician accept or reject it. It would bar payers from issuing automated denials or delays of coverage or payment, and require adverse determinations to be reviewed and signed by a physician. It died in committee on February 3, 2026.
Establishes Deepfake Technology Unit in DLPS; appropriates $2 million.
New Jersey's A3058 would have the Attorney General, consulting the State Chief Technology Officer, establish a Deepfake Technology Unit in the Division of Criminal Justice to analyze and authenticate evidence, give expert testimony and train law enforcement, prosecutors and courts. It would appropriate $2 million from the General Fund to the Department of Law and Public Safety.
Political campaign advertisements; synthetic media, penalty.
Virginia's HB 868 (2026 Regular Session) would bar electioneering communications containing synthetic media from being published or broadcast without a conspicuous statement that the message contains synthetic media that may present conduct or speech that did not occur. A violation would carry a civil penalty up to $25,000 and a willful violation a Class 1 misdemeanor. Continued to 2027 in committee on February 6, 2026.
Prohibit Use of Personally Identifying Feature
Colorado's HB26-1049 would have made it a crime to use another person's fingerprint, voiceprint, retina or iris scan, or facial map in an advertisement, deepfake, image, video, voice recording, or other digital depiction without permission: a class 5 felony, or a class 4 felony if done to intentionally harm that person. A harmed person could sue for damages and attorney fees. The House committee postponed it indefinitely February 12, 2026; it is dead.
Establishes age verification measures for companion chatbots
Not law. The committee version of HB 2032, the GUARD Act, would have made it unlawful in Missouri to design or offer a companion chatbot knowing or recklessly disregarding that it risks soliciting minors into sexually explicit conduct, or that it encourages suicide, self-injury or violence (fines up to $100,000 per offense). Operators would have had to require accounts, verify every user's age, freeze existing accounts until verified and bar minors from companion chatbots, with AI disclosures and Attorney General enforcement. A House committee voted 9-3 for it (reported April 2, 2026), but it never got a floor vote before the May 15, 2026 deadline for passing bills.
Establishes the "protect our privacy (POP) act" to impose limitations on the use of drones for law enforcement purposes; prohibits the use of drones by law enforcement at concerts, protests, demonstrations, or other actions protected by the first amendment.
New York's S 1096, the protect our privacy (POP) act, would add Civil Rights Law section 52-e. It would prohibit drone use by law enforcement agencies or for law enforcement purposes, with exceptions for search and rescue and examining dangerous areas after natural disasters, bar drones at concerts, protests and other First Amendment activity, and bar armed drones. Data from drones using facial recognition could not be used in investigations or prosecutions and would have to be deleted. Remedies would include suppression and a private action for the greater of $1,000 per violation or actual damages. Referred to Codes January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Deepfake Liability Act
The Deepfake Liability Act (H.R. 6334) would amend Section 230 of the Communications Act and the TAKE IT DOWN Act. Section 230(c)(1) protection would apply only to platforms that run a reasonable process against cyberstalking and intimate privacy violations, including sexually explicit digital forgeries, and platforms would have to remove such content within 48 hours of a valid request. Referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee on December 1, 2025; it has not passed either house.
Operation of autonomous vehicles on highways and providing a penalty.
Wisconsin's SB 831 (2025-26) would have created an Autonomous Driving Safety Board in the Department of Transportation to permit operation of Level 4 and 5 autonomous vehicles on approved highways other than interstates, with permit conditions, permit suspension and (per the LRB analysis) annual reports. The Senate transportation committee recommended passage 3-2 on March 2, 2026; it failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1 on March 23, 2026.
License for artificial intelligence independent verification organizations established, advisory council established, rulemaking authorized, and reports required.
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.
Mississippi Consumer Privacy Protection Act; create.
Mississippi's HB 1051 (2026) would have created the Mississippi Consumer Privacy Protection Act for businesses with over $25 million in revenue that handle personal information of 175,000+ consumers (or 25,000+ with over half of revenue from selling data). Consumers could opt out of profiling used for decisions with legal or similarly significant effects. It was referred to House Judiciary A on January 16, 2026 and died in committee on February 3, 2026.
Elections: deceptive media in advertisements.
California's AB 2839 (Elections Code 20012) bars knowingly distributing, with malice, an ad or election communication with materially deceptive content about candidates, elected or elections officials, or election equipment, from 120 days before an election (through 60 days after for elections officials and equipment). Signed September 17, 2024 (Chapter 262) as an urgency statute. In Kohls v. Bonta (E.D. Cal.), the court preliminarily enjoined enforcement on October 2, 2024 (except the audio-only disclosure part) and on August 29, 2025 held it unconstitutional and permanently enjoined the Attorney General and Secretary of State from enforcing it against the named plaintiffs.
Requiring a disclosure of deceptive artificial intelligence usage in political advertising.
New Hampshire's HB 1596 adds RSA 664:14-c. Within 90 days of an election, no person or entity may distribute a message created with AI or generative AI that it knows or should have known is a deepfake of a candidate, election official or party on the ballot, unless the media carries the required AI disclosure. Candidates and election officials may seek an injunction or damages. Signed August 2, 2024 (Chapter 345); effective August 1, 2024.
Generative artificial intelligence: training data: copyrighted materials.
California's AB 412 (2025-26 Regular Session) would add Civil Code Title 15.3 requiring a developer of a generative AI model to provide a website mechanism for rights owners to request information on use of their covered materials. Within 30 days of a request, subject to exceptions, the developer would assess whether the materials were used and give the owner a list. Passed the Assembly 45-16; held under submission in Senate Appropriations August 13, 2026; not passed.
Prohibits the use of surveillance pricing
New York's A 9349-B would amend General Business Law section 349-a to prohibit surveillance pricing, meaning prices set in whole or part by an algorithm using personal data to offer different prices to different customers for the same goods or services. It would replace the current disclosure requirement with a ban, and bar using personal data to enable it. The Assembly passed it June 4, 2026; the Senate substituted it for S 8623-B and passed it June 4, 2026; as of October 8, 2026 the records show no delivery to or action by the Governor.
Preventing Algorithmic Collusion Act of 2025
The federal S 232 (Preventing Algorithmic Collusion Act of 2025) would make it unlawful to use or distribute a pricing algorithm that uses or was trained with nonpublic competitor data, with federal civil penalties. It would also require audit reports on request and disclosures of algorithmic pricing by companies with $5 million or more in revenue. Read twice and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee January 23, 2025; it has not passed either house.
An Act Concerning Artificial Intelligence.
Connecticut's SB 2, as passed by the Senate (File 603 as amended by Senate Amendments A and B, as described in the OLR bill analysis), would require anyone doing business in the state to tell consumers when they interact with an AI system, and deployers of high-risk AI systems used in consequential decisions to give notices, explain adverse decisions and allow correction and appeal, beginning October 1, 2026, with attorney general enforcement. It would also create AI studies, an AI Academy and a synthetic intimate image crime. Passed the Senate May 14, 2025; tabled on the House calendar May 16, 2025; it did not pass the House.
Algorithmic pricing of essential consumer goods, granting rule-making authority, and providing a penalty.
Wisconsin's AB 1190 would restrict grocery retailers' use of personalized algorithmic pricing on essential consumer goods: required disclosure on each such price, no electronic display of those prices in grocery stores of 15,000+ square feet, no pricing that varies by protected traits, and no buying consumer data from data brokers for pricing. Introduced March 19, 2026 and referred to the Assembly Committee on Consumer Protection; failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1 on March 23, 2026, so it did not pass.
Virginia Fair Housing Law, et al.; personalized algorithmic pricing disclosures, prohibitions.
Virginia's SB 585 as introduced would require disclosure of personalized algorithmic pricing by residential property owners, landlords and multiple listing services, ban using protected class data to set housing prices, and bar landlords from using coordinating algorithmic software to set rents or facilitate agreements not to compete. Prefiled January 14, 2026; the Senate General Laws and Technology Committee passed it by indefinitely (15-0) February 4, 2026, so it did not pass.
Autonomous Vehicles
Florida's CS/SB 712 (2018, committee substitute) would have let a fully autonomous vehicle operate in Florida whether or not a licensed human operator is physically present, with the automated driving system deemed the operator. It would have required fully autonomous vehicles to carry at least $500,000 in combined liability coverage (plus PIP and uninsured motorist coverage), allowed the Florida Turnpike Enterprise to build test facilities, and exempted autonomous vehicles from the in-vehicle video display ban. Scheduled to take effect July 1, 2018, it died in Banking and Insurance on March 10, 2018.
Stop AI Price Gouging and Wage Fixing Act of 2025
The federal H.R. 4640, the Stop AI Price Gouging and Wage Fixing Act of 2025, would bar a person from surveillance-based price setting (using an automated decision system to set a customized price from surveillance data) and from surveillance-based wage setting, with limited exceptions, and would require data-accuracy, correction and disclosure procedures to be published 180 days before relying on a price exception or using a wage-setting system. The FTC, state attorneys general and, for wages, the EEOC could enforce it; private suits would seek the greater of actual damages or $3,000 per violation. Introduced July 23, 2025; it remains in committee and has not passed either chamber.
Consumer data protection and providing a penalty. (FE)
Wisconsin's SB 166 (as introduced March 27, 2025) would create a consumer data protection law (s. 100.80) for controllers handling the personal data of 100,000+ consumers, or 25,000+ consumers while deriving over 50 percent of revenue from selling data. Consumers could access, correct, delete and obtain their data and opt out of targeted advertising, sale and certain forms of automated processing. Controllers would owe privacy notices and data protection assessments, including for profiling. Violators would face forfeitures up to $10,000 per violation. It failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1 on March 23, 2026 and did not become law.
Artificial intelligence; regulate use in health coverage decisions
Alabama's HB 515 (2025, as introduced) would have limited how health insurers use AI, algorithms or other software in utilization review. Medical necessity determinations would always have been made by a licensed physician or other competent health care professional. Insurers would have had to disclose AI use to enrollees and contracting providers, periodically review outcomes, and face civil suits for compensatory or punitive damages. Introduced April 3, 2025 and referred to the House Committee on Insurance; it died in committee when the 2025 session ended.
SAFE AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE ACT
Illinois's HB 2747 (100th General Assembly, 2017-2018) would have created the Safe Autonomous Vehicle (SAVE) Act. A motor vehicle manufacturer could start a SAVE project after notifying the Department of Motor Vehicles and self-certifying that its automated driving system (ADS) fleet meets listed conditions. The manufacturer would insure the fleet and assume liability where the ADS is at fault. Operating an ADS vehicle without meeting the requirements would draw a $10,000 fine, and a second violation would be a Class A misdemeanor. The bill did not pass before the 100th General Assembly ended in January 2019.
AI Fraud Accountability Act of 2026
The federal S. 3982 (AI Fraud Accountability Act of 2026) would make it a federal crime, punishable by up to 3 years in prison and a fine, to pose falsely as a real or imaginary person in an AI-made or other computer-generated audio or visual impersonation, intended to be taken as genuine, to defraud someone. It would also make the conduct an FTC-enforced unfair or deceptive practice. Referred to the Senate Commerce Committee March 4, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
AI Accountability and Personal Data Protection Act
The federal S. 2367 (AI Accountability and Personal Data Protection Act) would make it a federal tort to appropriate, use, collect, process, sell or otherwise exploit an individual's covered data without express, prior consent, including training a generative AI system on it or using one to generate content derived from it. Individuals could sue for the greater of actual damages, treble profits or $1,000, plus punitive damages and fees. Referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee July 21, 2025; it has not passed either chamber.
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.
AUTONOMOUS VEHICLE ACT
Illinois's SB 1432 (100th General Assembly), as introduced, would have created the Safe Autonomous Vehicle (SAVE) Act, letting a motor vehicle manufacturer start a safe autonomous vehicle project with automated driving system vehicles after notifying the Department of Motor Vehicles and self-certifying. Senate Committee Amendment No. 1, adopted in committee, replaced it with an Autonomous Vehicle Act. The bill was not passed before the 100th General Assembly ended (Session Sine Die, January 9, 2019).
Synthetic digital representations and providing a penalty.
Wisconsin's SB 815 would have created s. 942.085, making it a Class A misdemeanor to create and post, publish, distribute or exhibit a deepfake (a synthetic digital representation of an individual's recognizable face, voice or likeness that looks authentic and was made without consent) with intent to coerce, harass or intimidate, and a Class I felony if done with intent to defraud, coerce or intimidate for monetary gain. Introduced January 14, 2026 and referred to committee; it failed to pass March 23, 2026.
Georgia Likeness, Expression, Generative AI, and Commercial Yield (LEGACY) Act; enact
Georgia's HB 1399 (2026), the Georgia Likeness, Expression, Generative AI, and Commercial Yield (LEGACY) Act, would have given every individual a property right in their likeness and required the individual's written consent to create, distribute or exploit a digital replica of them for commercial purposes. Aggrieved individuals could have sued for damages, punitive damages and injunctions. It was read the second time in the House February 24, 2026 and died when the session adjourned April 2, 2026.
RISE Act of 2025 Responsible Innovation and Safe Expertise Act of 2025
The RISE Act would shield AI developers from civil liability for errors made by their AI products when licensed or certified professionals use them to serve clients, if the developer publishes a model card and its model specification (including system prompts) before deployment and gives professionals clear documentation of known limitations, failure modes and appropriate uses. The shield would not cover recklessness or willful misconduct, would be lost if disclosures are not updated within 30 days of a new version or newly found failure mode, and would preempt covered state-law claims except those for fraud, knowing misrepresentation or non-professional use. Introduced June 12, 2025.
NO FAKES Act of 2025; enact
Georgia's HB 566 (NO FAKES Act) would add a new Article 38 to Title 10, Chapter 1, giving each individual or right holder the right to authorize use of the individual's voice or visual likeness in a digital replica. The right would be a property right, not assignable during life, licensable, and would not expire at death. The House committee substitute (renamed the NO FAKES Act of 2026) was reported on February 25, 2026, but the bill did not pass the House and died when the 2025-2026 session ended. It never became law.
PROTECT IMAGE-VOICE-LOOKS
Illinois's HB 5594 (103rd General Assembly) would have created the NO FAKES Act, giving each individual (and after death their heirs) a descendible, licensable property right to authorize use of their image, voice or visual likeness in a digital replica, enforceable by civil action with the greater of $5,000 per violation or actual damages. It was not passed before the 103rd General Assembly ended (Session Sine Die, January 7, 2025).
Clarifies that owners of self-driving motor vehicles must comply with existing insurance requirements.
New Jersey's S2324 would extend the State's no-fault Automobile Reparation Reform Act and compulsory liability insurance requirement to self-driving vehicles capable of operating without active control or monitoring by a human operator, so their owners would have to carry the same coverage as other owners, including personal injury protection (per the Statement).
Establishes consumers' foundational data privacy rights; creates oversight mechanisms; establishes enforcement mechanisms; establishes the privacy and security victims relief fund.
New York's A5827 (2025-26) would add a new Article 46, the "American Data Privacy and Protection Act", to the General Business Law, covering data minimization, a duty of loyalty, consumer rights to access, correct, delete and port covered data, and consent and opt-out rules for transfers and targeted advertising; its title also establishes a privacy and security victims relief fund. A large data holder using a covered algorithm in a way that poses a consequential risk of harm would have to conduct an impact assessment of it. Referred to the Assembly Science and Technology Committee February 20, 2025 and again January 7, 2026; not enacted.
Protecting Children from Chatbots
South Carolina's S 1037, the Protecting Children from Chatbots Act (new Chapter 81 of Title 39), would require chatbot operators with five hundred thousand or more monthly active users worldwide to offer a limited-access mode, verify age and obtain verifiable parental consent before minors use restricted features. The Attorney General could seek civil penalties of up to $50,000 per violation. Referred to the Senate Labor, Commerce and Industry Committee March 19, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Requires the registration of certain companies whose primary business purpose is related to artificial intelligence as evidenced by their NAIC code.
New York's S 8214-A (2023-2024) would have added General Business Law Article 2-A (§§ 20 and 20-a) requiring the Secretary of State to require biennial registration of businesses with NAIC code 541512, 334220 or 513210 (541512, 334220, 513210) located in or selling in New York, for a fee of $200 per registration. Violations would be punishable by a fine of up to $10,000, and the Attorney General could seek to bar knowing non-registrants for up to ten years. It died in committee when the 2023-2024 session ended.
Prohibits the use of facial recognition and biometric information as the sole factor in determining the existence of probable cause to place in custody or arrest an individual.
New York's A 1447 would amend the Executive Law (new § 837-z) so that biometric identifying technology, including facial recognition, cannot be the sole factor in determining probable cause to place a person in custody or arrest them. By January 1, 2027, every municipal police department, sheriff's office and the State Police would have to adopt a written policy barring stops, detentions or searches solely motivated by the technology, or the Division of Criminal Justice Services would order a penalty of withheld state funds. Would take effect immediately. Referred to Governmental Operations January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
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.
Creates a temporary state commission to study and investigate how to regulate artificial intelligence, robotics and automation; repeals such commission.
New York's S 6301 would create a temporary state commission on artificial intelligence, robotics and automation to study subjects such as current state law, civil and criminal liability, employment effects and public-sector uses. It would have 14 members, with no pay beyond expenses, and must issue a final report; the act would expire December 31, 2026. It places no duties on businesses. Referred to Internet and Technology January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Artificial intelligence; prohibit use in provision of professional mental and behaioral health care.
Mississippi's HB 1720 (2026) would bar licensed mental and behavioral health professionals (counselors, psychologists, social workers, marriage and family therapists, art and music therapists) from using AI in their practice, except for administrative and supplementary support such as scheduling and billing. It would bar anyone from offering therapy to the public, including through Internet-based AI, unless a licensed professional conducts it. Civil penalty up to $10,000 per violation. It died in committee on February 3, 2026.
Internet and E-mail Fraud; the criminal offense of digital identity fraud; establish
SB594 seeks to establish the criminal offense of digital identity fraud in Georgia, providing for criminal and civil penalties, a cause of action and damages, definitions, and repealing conflicting laws.
Creates the RI Pedestrian Safety Act allows cities and town to use automated safety monitoring which a civil fine of $50 for violations.
The RI Pedestrian Safety Act authorizes cities and towns in Rhode Island to use automated safety monitoring systems, imposing a $50 civil fine for speeding and red-light violations.
An Act To Amend Title 6 Of The Delaware Code Regarding Communication With A Computer.
Delaware's HB 306 (153rd General Assembly) would add the Computer Communication Act (6 Del. C. ch. 25N). It would be an unlawful practice to engage or attempt to engage in a commercial transaction with a consumer who is interacting by text or voice with computer technology, such as a chatbot, AI agent or avatar, that could lead a reasonable person to believe they are dealing with a human, unless the person clearly and conspicuously discloses it is a computer. Consumers could sue for actual damages plus up to $1,000; civil penalties could reach $5 million per cause of action. Effective 180 days after enactment. Introduced March 5, 2026; in a Senate committee as of May 5, 2026.
Creates a temporary state commission to study and investigate how to regulate artificial intelligence, robotics and automation; repeals such commission.
New York's A 9559 would have created a temporary 14-member “New York state artificial intelligence, robotics and automation commission” to study how to regulate AI, robotics and automation, including current state law, other states' policies, civil and criminal liability for entities equipped with AI, employment impact, use in weaponry and public sector applications. Members would serve without compensation and a final report was due no later than thirty days before the act expired on December 31, 2025. Referred to Science and Technology March 20, 2024; it died at the end of the 2023-2024 session.
Election Law - Influence on a Voter's Voting Decision By Use of Fraud - Prohibition
Maryland's SB 361 (2025, third reader text) would have added to the election law ban on influencing a voter's decision by force, threat or bribery a ban on doing so through fraud, with fraud including the use of synthetic media: an image, audio or video recording intentionally created or manipulated with generative AI or other digital technology to create a realistic but false image or recording. Violators would face the existing misdemeanor penalty (up to $5,000, 5 years, or both). It passed the Senate, was amended by the House, and went to conference; the Senate adopted the conference report April 7, 2025 (39-8), but the history shows no House action on it, so it died.
Safe Autonomous Vehicle Act
Illinois's HB 1839 (104th General Assembly) would create the Safe Autonomous Vehicle Act. A motor vehicle manufacturer could start a safe autonomous vehicle project with an Automated Driving System after notifying the Secretary of State and self-certifying under certain conditions. The manufacturer would insure the fleet and assume liability when the system is at fault. Re-referred to the House Rules Committee on March 27, 2026.
AI Model Safety
Illinois's SB 3444 (104th General Assembly) would create the Artificial Intelligence Safety Act. A frontier AI model developer would not be liable for critical harms it did not intentionally or recklessly cause, if it publishes a safety and security protocol and transparency report on its website. Re-referred to Senate Assignments on May 22, 2026.
Personal delivery devices
Indiana's HB 1072 (P.L. 15-2021) authorizes delivery robots. A personal delivery device is a powered device of up to 500 pounds, excluding cargo, used mainly on sidewalks and crosswalks to carry property and capable of navigating with or without the active control or monitoring of an individual. Devices may operate on sidewalks, crosswalks, roads and streets, but not on state highway system routes inside municipalities, and must carry a unique identifying number and operator identification. Operators need $100,000 of liability insurance, and local governments may restrict devices by ordinance after a public meeting and notice to affected companies. Effective July 1, 2021.
Worker data: prohibitions: artificial intelligence.
California's AB 2027 (2025-26 Regular Session) would add Labor Code provisions barring an employer from using a worker's personal information to train an artificial intelligence system to replicate, automate, or replace the worker's job, or from selling or providing that information to a third party for that purpose. Vendors serving employers would face parallel limits and contract terms. Held under submission in Assembly Appropriations on May 14, 2026; not passed before the session ended.
Workplace artificial intelligence tools.
California's AB 1898 (2025-26 Regular Session) would add Labor Code Part 5.9, Artificial Intelligence Transparency at Work. An employer would have to give a worker written notice that a workplace AI tool was used to assist in employment-related decisions or to surveil workers, and keep an updated list of such tools and their impact on jobs, provided to workers annually. Penalties could reach $500 per employee per violation. Held in Assembly Appropriations May 14, 2026; not passed.
AI Chatbots-Licensing, Safety, and Privacy.
SB 963 would require a state license from the North Carolina Department of Justice to operate or distribute any chatbot dealing substantially with health information, with evidence of effectiveness, insurance, encryption, fast breach reporting and annual audits. A Chatbot Safety and Privacy Act would give larger chatbot providers a duty of loyalty: respond to users at risk of harm, prevent emotional dependence, disclose at each new interaction that the chatbot is not human and get consent, deidentify data, and keep sensitive data out of training. Users could sue for $1,000 per violation. Pending in the Senate.
An Act Concerning Online Safety
Public Act 26-15 is Connecticut's main AI statute. AI companion operators must disclose that users are talking to AI, run suicide and self-harm protocols and protect minors (from Jan. 1, 2027). Developers and deployers of automated employment-related decision technology must give notices to workers and applicants, enforced by the Attorney General, and AI use is no defense to discrimination claims (Oct. 1, 2026). It also adds frontier-developer whistleblower protections, provenance duties for large generative AI providers, AI subscription disclosures, a statutory AI definition, the CT AI Academy, an AI working group and state-agency AI inventory and assessment rules.
Artificial Intelligence Companion Chatbots and Minors Act; established, enforcement, civil penalty.
Virginia's SB 796 (2026 Regular Session) would create the Artificial Intelligence Chatbots and Minors Act. Covered entities would have to implement reasonable systems and processes, try to notify emergency services of imminent risk and report covered incidents to the Attorney General. Passed the Senate 39-1; continued to 2027 in the House on March 2, 2026.
Prohibits artificial intelligence companions from using features which are considered unsafe for minors
Passed both houses; awaiting the Governor. S 9051-B would bar operators of AI companions and other generative AI chatbots that give ongoing, adaptive responses from offering 'unsafe AI companion features' to New York users unless approved age-assurance methods show the user is not a minor. Unsafe features include claiming to be human or to feel emotions, claiming a personal or authority relationship, flattery, unprompted emotional questions, recalling personal or health details after 12 hours, encouraging secrecy or isolation, promoting self-harm, and sexual content. Customer-service and internal business bots are exempt. Fines up to $25,000 per violation. If signed, effective Jan. 1, 2027.
Labor: fair employment practices; use of electronic monitoring or automated decisions tools by an employer; prohibit except for certain purposes. Creates new act.
Michigan's HB 5579, the 'responsible artificial intelligence security for employees act', would bar employers from using an automated decisions tool to make an employment-related decision, except to screen large volumes of applications or assess job skills. It would also limit electronic monitoring, require independent impact assessments, and allow civil fines of up to $500. Introduced February 24, 2026 and referred to the House Committee on Economic Competitiveness; it has not passed either chamber.
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.
Artificial Intelligence Chatbots Act; established, prohibited practices, penalties.
Virginia's HB 635 (2026 Regular Session) would create the Artificial Intelligence Chatbots Act. As introduced, an operator could not offer a companion chatbot in Virginia unless it is incapable of certain specified actions, and would have to show non-human disclosures and have a suicide and self-harm protocol. Continued to 2027 on February 9, 2026.
Online Privacy Act of 2026
The federal H.R. 8014 (Online Privacy Act of 2026) would create individual privacy rights and security duties for covered entities that intentionally collect, process or maintain personal information and send or receive it over the internet, and a new Digital Privacy Agency to enforce them. Its AI-related parts include a right to human review of solely automated decisions that materially increase reasonably foreseeable significant privacy harms and a ban on behavioral personalization without affirmative express consent. Introduced March 19, 2026 and referred to House committees; no further action.
Eliminating Bias in Algorithmic Systems Act of 2026
The federal S. 3680 (Eliminating Bias in Algorithmic Systems Act of 2026) would require the head of each federal agency that uses, funds, procures, oversees, regulates or advises on machine-learning or AI-based algorithms with a material effect on programs, economic opportunities or protected rights to ensure it has an office of civil rights focused on algorithmic bias and discrimination. Those offices would report to Congress 1 year after enactment and every 2 years after, and DOJ would convene an interagency working group. Introduced January 15, 2026 and referred to the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee; no further action.
Eliminating Bias in Algorithmic Systems Act of 2026
The federal H.R. 7110 (Eliminating Bias in Algorithmic Systems Act of 2026) would require the head of each federal agency that uses, funds, procures, oversees, regulates or advises on machine-learning or AI-based algorithms with a material effect on programs, economic opportunities or protected rights to ensure it has an office of civil rights focused on algorithmic bias and discrimination. Those offices would report to Congress 1 year after enactment and every 2 years after, and DOJ would convene an interagency working group. Introduced January 15, 2026 and referred to the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee; no further action.
Artificial Intelligence Civil Rights Act of 2025
The federal S. 3308 (Artificial Intelligence Civil Rights Act of 2025) would bar developers and deployers from offering or using a covered algorithm in a way that causes or contributes to disparate impact or otherwise discriminates based on a protected characteristic in consequential actions such as employment, education, housing, health care, credit, insurance and government benefits. It would require independent-auditor evaluations and annual assessments, public disclosures, human alternatives and appeals, with enforcement by the FTC, State attorneys general and private suits. Introduced December 2, 2025 and referred to the Senate Commerce Committee; no further action.
SANDBOX Act Strengthening Artificial intelligence Normalization and Diffusion By Oversight and eXperimentation Act
The federal S. 2750 (SANDBOX Act) would require the OSTP Director to establish, within one year after enactment, an AI regulatory sandbox where persons may apply for temporary waivers or modifications of federal agency rules to test AI products, services or development methods. Agencies would decide within 90 days; waivers last 2 years with up to four 2-year renewals. Participants must report harmful incidents within 72 hours and make consumer disclosures, and the program ends 12 years after it is established. Introduced September 10, 2025 and referred to the Senate Commerce Committee; no further action.
Unleashing AI Innovation in Financial Services Act
The federal S. 2528 (Unleashing AI Innovation in Financial Services Act) would require each federal financial regulatory agency to establish, or identify an office to serve as, an AI Innovation Lab where regulated entities may apply to run AI test projects under an alternative compliance strategy waiving or modifying a regulation. Agencies would have 120 days to decide (extendable by 120 days, after which the application is deemed approved) and must issue rules within 180 days after enactment. Introduced July 29, 2025 and referred to the Senate Banking Committee; no further action.
AI Impersonation Prevention Act of 2025
The federal H.R. 4628 (AI Impersonation Prevention Act of 2025) would amend 18 U.S.C. 912 to make it a crime to knowingly use AI to impersonate an officer or employee of the United States, including by mimicking a federal officer's voice or likeness without an explicit disclaimer, and thereby produce materially false or misleading content. The penalty is a fine or up to three years in prison, or both. Satire, parody and protected expression with a clear disclosure of inauthenticity are not limited. Introduced July 23, 2025 and referred to the House Judiciary Committee; no further action.
PROACTIV Artificial Intelligence Data Act of 2025 Preventing Recurring Online Abuse of Children Through Intentional Vetting of Artificial Intelligence Data Act of 2025
The federal S. 2381 (PROACTIV Artificial Intelligence Data Act of 2025) would require the NIST Director, within 1 year after enactment, to develop and publish a voluntary framework for AI developers and data collectors to detect, remove and regularly report child pornography in AI training datasets built with automated crawlers or scrapers. Developers and data collectors acting in accordance with it would be shielded from lawsuits, with exceptions for intentional misconduct, malice, recklessness and gross negligence. Introduced July 22, 2025 and referred to the Senate Commerce Committee; no further action.
Protect Elections from Deceptive AI Act
The federal S. 1213 (Protect Elections from Deceptive AI Act) would add Section 325 to the Federal Election Campaign Act to bar any person, committee or entity from knowingly distributing materially deceptive AI-generated audio or visual media of a federal candidate, or in carrying out federal election activity, to influence an election or solicit funds. Candidates could sue for injunctions and damages. Introduced March 31, 2025 and referred to the Senate Rules Committee; no further action.
Unleashing AI Innovation in Financial Services Act
The federal H.R. 9309 (Unleashing AI Innovation in Financial Services Act) would have required each financial regulatory agency to set up a regulatory sandbox where regulated entities could test AI projects with waivers of rules. Agencies would have had 90 days to decide applications, and an undecided application after a 90-day extension would be deemed approved. Introduced August 6, 2024 and referred to the House Financial Services Committee; it died when the 118th Congress ended on January 3, 2025.
Prohibits the use of a facial recognition system by a landlord on any residential premises.
New York's A 322 (2023-2024) would have added Real Property Law § 235-j making it unlawful for any landlord to obtain, retain, access or use, on any residential premises, a facial recognition system or information obtained from one. The Attorney General could seek an injunction, restitution and a civil penalty of up to $10,000; affected people could sue for actual damages or $1,000, whichever is greater, plus attorneys' fees. Referred to the Housing Committee January 4, 2023 and again January 3, 2024; it never passed either chamber and died at the end of the 2023-2024 session.
Requires advertisements to disclose the use of a synthetic performer; imposes a $1,000 civil penalty for a first violation and a $5,000 penalty for any subsequent violation.
New York's A 606-B would have amended General Business Law § 396-b to require a person in the business of dealing in property or services who places a commercial advertisement to conspicuously disclose a synthetic performer in it, where the person has actual knowledge. The civil penalty would have been $1,000 for a first violation and $5,000 for any subsequent one; advertisements for expressive works such as films and video games were exempt if the use matched the work. Reported and placed on the Assembly third reading calendar in 2025, the enacting clause was stricken January 12, 2026. A Senate version, S1228-C, exists.
Provides that a person may operate a fully autonomous vehicle on the public roads of this state without a human driver provided that the automated driving system is engaged and the vehicle meets certain conditions; defines terms; requires insurance and that such vehicle is registered as a fully…
New York's A 3650 would have added Vehicle and Traffic Law Article 34-E allowing a fully autonomous vehicle (SAE level 4 or 5) to operate on public roads without a human driver when its automated driving system is engaged, if it can reach a minimal risk condition, is registered and titled as fully autonomous, and the operator files a law enforcement interaction plan and proof of insurance. The Department of Motor Vehicles would be the exclusive state regulator. Introduced January 29, 2025; enacting clause stricken February 5, 2025.
Crimes and punishments; creating and disseminating a digitization or synthetic media; making certain acts unlawful; emergency.
Not law. The committee substitute for HB 3299 would have made it a misdemeanor in Oklahoma (up to 1 year and $1,000) to create and disseminate synthetic media of another person's name, image, voice or likeness without written consent and with intent to deceive and cause harm, and a felony (up to 5 years and $10,000) when it causes over $25,000 in financial harm or is used for extortion or blackmail. It would also have required disclosure of synthetic media in political ads and attestations from content creators. It cleared House committees in February 2026 but never received a House floor vote.
Prohibits the use of a facial recognition system by a landlord on any residential premises.
New York's A 6363 would add Real Property Law § 235-k making it unlawful for any landlord to obtain, retain, access or use, on residential premises, any facial recognition system or information obtained from one. The Attorney General could seek an injunction and a civil penalty of not more than $10,000; individuals could sue for actual damages or $1,000, whichever is greater, plus attorneys' fees. Would take effect on the 120th day after it becomes law. Introduced March 4, 2025 and referred to the Housing Committee (again January 7, 2026); it has not passed either chamber.
AN ACT relating to autonomous vehicles.
Kentucky's HB 7 (2024 Ky. Acts Ch. 176), enacted over the Governor's veto, sets rules for fully autonomous vehicles in KRS Chapter 186. Vehicles with automated driving systems may operate on public highways if they meet the act's requirements, including a law enforcement interaction plan filed with the Transportation Cabinet and State Police, single-limit liability coverage or self-insurance of at least $1,000,000, and titling and registration. Until July 31, 2026, fully autonomous vehicles over 62,000 pounds must carry a credentialed human driver to monitor and intervene. The Transportation Cabinet is the sole regulator and local governments may not add rules.
AN ACT relating to privacy protection.
Kentucky's HB 45 (2024 session) was a privacy bill covering automated license plate readers (data kept no more than 30 days with exceptions, no sale), drone surveillance, deep fakes, identification devices and tracking devices. The deep fake sections would have given a civil action against anyone who willfully and knowingly disseminated a deep fake without written consent and made certain harmful disclosures a Class D felony. The House passed it 96-0 with a committee substitute on February 28, 2024; in the Senate it was reassigned to Transportation March 7, 2024 and died.
Enacts the "New York artificial intelligence transparency for journalism act"; requires developers of generative artificial intelligence systems or services to post certain information on the developer's website regarding video, audio, text and data from a covered publication used to train the…
New York's A 8595-B, the "New York artificial intelligence transparency for journalism act," would add General Business Law §§ 338 to 338-D. By January 1, 2027, generative AI developers serving New Yorkers would have to post the URLs crawled, a description of covered-publication content used, whether copyright notices were removed and the collection timeframe, and disclose crawler details. A journalism provider could sue for compliance and statutory damages of up to $10,000 per violation. Would take effect immediately. Amended June 9, 2025 and referred to Codes (again January 7, 2026); it has not passed either chamber.
Prohibits political communication containing any photo, video or audio depiction of a candidate created in whole or in part through the use of generative artificial intelligence.
New York's A 9054 (2023-2024 session), the "respect electoral audiovisual legitimacy (REAL) act," would have added subdivision 2-a to Election Law § 14-106 providing that no political communication covered by that section "shall contain any realistic photo, video or audio depiction of a candidate, or person interacting with a candidate, containing original material created in whole or in part through the use of generative artificial intelligence." It defined generative AI and stated no penalty. Introduced February 5, 2024 and referred to the Election Law Committee; it never advanced and died at the end of the 2023-2024 session.
Requires any political communication, whether made by phone call, email or other message-based communication, that utilizes an artificial intelligence system to engage in human-like conversation with another shall, by reasonable means, apprise the person of the fact that they are communicating with…
New York's A 9103 (2023-2024 session) would have added subdivision 5 to Election Law § 14-106 requiring a political communication made by phone call, email or other message-based communication that uses an artificial intelligence system to engage in human-like conversation with another person to apprise that person, by reasonable means, that they are communicating with an AI system. It defined no terms and stated no penalty. Introduced February 7, 2024 and referred to the Election Law Committee; it never advanced and died at the end of the 2023-2024 session.
Provides for notice requirements where an insurer authorized to write accident and health insurance in this state, a corporation organized pursuant to article forty-three of this chapter, or a health maintenance organization certified pursuant to article forty-four of the public health law uses…
New York's A 9149 (2023-2024 session) would have added Insurance Law § 338. Accident and health insurers, article 43 corporations and certified HMOs would have had to post on their websites whether they use AI-based algorithms in utilization review, submit the algorithms and training data to the Department for bias certification, and ensure a clinical peer reviewer documents review of individual clinical records before an adverse determination. Penalties included fines up to $5,000 per violation ($10,000 if willful) and license action. Introduced February 8, 2024 and referred to the Insurance Committee; it never advanced and died at the end of the 2023-2024 session.
AN ACT relating to autonomous vehicles.
Vetoed. Kentucky's HB 135 (2023) would have let fully autonomous vehicles (SAE level 4 or 5) run on Kentucky highways without a human driver if the system could reach a minimal risk condition after a failure and follow traffic laws. Operators would have filed a law enforcement interaction plan with the Transportation Cabinet and State Police and shown $5 million in liability coverage; the owner would have been the operator under traffic laws, public agencies could not ban the vehicles, and only the lead truck in a platoon would have needed a driver. The Governor vetoed it April 10, 2023.
Prohibits state agencies and state-owned entities from utilizing large language models or any artificial intelligence systems to make decisions that affect individuals' rights, benefits, or services; requires such decisions to be made by human personnel of the respective state agency or state-owned…
New York's A 10583 would have added State Technology Law § 106-c barring state agencies and state-owned entities from implementing or using large language models or any AI systems to make decisions affecting individuals' rights, benefits or services; such decisions would have had to be made by human personnel. Purely advisory use and AI use for data analysis, research or other non-decision-making purposes was allowed. Referred to Science and Technology June 20, 2024; it died at the end of the 2023-2024 session.
Criminal Procedure – Facial Recognition Technology – Requirements, Procedures, and Prohibitions
Maryland's HB 338 limits police use of facial recognition technology in criminal investigations to listed serious crimes (crimes of violence, human trafficking, child abuse, hate crimes, weapon crimes, stalking and others), bans live or real-time identification, and allows searches only of license, ID and mugshot photos unless an agreement governs another database. A trained person must verify each result before use; results cannot alone establish probable cause or identity and serve as evidence only for warrants and preliminary hearings. Agencies must audit, post policies and report yearly. Signed May 16, 2024 (Chapter 809; identical to SB 182, Chapter 808); effective October 1, 2024.
Criminal Procedure - Facial Recognition Technology - Requirements, Procedures, and Prohibitions
Maryland's SB 182 limits police use of facial recognition technology in criminal investigations to listed serious crimes (crimes of violence, human trafficking, child abuse, hate crimes, weapon crimes, stalking and others), bans live or real-time identification, and allows searches only of license, ID and mugshot photos unless an agreement governs another database. A trained person must verify each result before use; results cannot alone establish probable cause or identity and serve as evidence only for warrants and preliminary hearings. Agencies must audit, post policies and report yearly. Signed May 16, 2024 (Chapter 808; identical to HB 338, Chapter 809); effective October 1, 2024.
Consumer Protection – Online Products and Services – Data of Children (Maryland Kids Code)
Maryland's SB 571 (Kids Code) covers for-profit firms doing business in Maryland that have over $25M revenue, buy, receive, sell or share data of 50,000+ consumers, households or devices yearly, or get at least half their revenue from data sales. For online products reasonably likely to be accessed by under-18s they must do impact assessments (existing ones by April 1, 2026) and set high-privacy defaults. AI-related: no default profiling of children without safeguards and need or a compelling reason; assessments weigh algorithm harms. Fines up to $7,500 per child per violation. Signed May 9, 2024 (Chapter 460; same as HB 603); effective October 1, 2024. Not enjoined; NetChoice suit pending.
Algorithmic Addiction Fund - Establishment
Maryland's SB 739 (2024) would have created the Algorithmic Addiction Fund, a special nonlapsing fund holding revenue the State receives from judgments or settlements with technology or social media companies on State-law damages claims, plus money appropriated in the State budget, for algorithmic addiction prevention and treatment. The Secretary of Health would set goals, run a grant program and report each November 1. A Senate Finance hearing was set for February 20, 2024; it died when the session ended.
Labor and Employment - Use of Facial Recognition Services - Prohibition
Maryland's HB 1202 bars employers from using a facial recognition service to create a facial template (the machine-interpretable pattern of facial features extracted from images) during a job applicant's interview unless the applicant consents by signing a waiver. The waiver must state in plain language the applicant's name, the interview date, that the applicant consents to facial recognition during the interview, and whether the applicant read the waiver. The act itself sets no penalty. Became law without the Governor's signature (Chapter 446, May 8, 2020); effective October 1, 2020.
Transportation: other; definition of automated driving systems and automated vehicle roadway; modify and expand.
Michigan's Public Act 179 of 2022 amends the Vehicle Code (MCL 257.2b, 257.642, 257.665 and new 257.665c-665e and 257.666a). It redefines automated driving systems, lets the Department of Transportation designate automated vehicle roadways and lanes, charge user fees and contract with roadway system providers, and makes unauthorized use of those lanes a civil infraction enforceable with system data. It also revises testing rules for automated vehicles, treats an engaged automated driving system as the driver, and allows truck platoons. Effective July 25, 2022.
Criminal offenses; enhance penalties for certain if artificial intelligence was used in the commission of.
Mississippi's HB 840 (2026) would have allowed enhanced penalties when a trier of fact finds beyond a reasonable doubt that a defendant knowingly and intentionally used an artificial intelligence system in committing a designated offense. It would also have amended Section 97-5-33 to cover visual depictions of a child that would appear realistic to a reasonable observer engaging in sexually explicit conduct. It was referred to Judiciary B on January 16, 2026, and died in committee on February 3, 2026.
Prohibits use of algorithm or artificial intelligence to set residential rental amounts and prohibits landlord price fixing of residential rents. Violations constitute a deceptive trade practice and violators are subject to civil suit.
Rhode Island H 8058 (2024), as introduced on March 13, 2024, would add section 34-18-15.1 barring any landlord or person from using an algorithm, commercial computer program or digital technology, including AI, to set or determine residential rent. It would also bar sharing rental information with intent to stabilize rents across owners. Violations would be deceptive trade practices, with civil actions for injunctions, damages and treble damages. The text says it takes effect upon passage.
VEH CD-SAFETY ZONES
Illinois' Public Act 104-0381 (SB 1507) adds subsection (v) to the Vehicle Code's automated speed enforcement section (625 ILCS 5/11-208.8). The University of Illinois Chicago Urban Transportation Center must study North and South DuSable Lake Shore Drive, reviewing Chicago's multi-year crash data, research on how effective AI-powered cameras could be at improving compliance and reducing crashes and deaths, risky driving patterns, psychological deterrence of habitual speeding, and how AI cameras or alternatives could reduce fatalities. The act sets no deadline and does not authorize AI cameras. Approved August 15, 2025; effective January 1, 2026.
Autonomous vehicles; allowing fully automated vehicles to operate on public roads. Effective date.
Oklahoma's SB 1541 (2022) lets fully autonomous vehicles drive on public roads without a human driver when the automated driving system is engaged and the vehicle can reach a minimal risk condition if the system fails, can obey traffic laws and meets federal safety certification. Before driverless operation, the operator must file a law enforcement interaction plan with the Department of Public Safety and prove at least $1 million of insurance or self-insurance. The vehicle must stay at the scene of a crash and the owner must report it. The automated driving system counts as the licensed driver. Effective November 1, 2022.
CATCH Fentanyl Act Contraband Awareness Technology Catches Harmful Fentanyl Act
The CATCH Fentanyl Act proposes a federal pilot program to assess technology for enhancing cargo inspections at U.S. land ports of entry.
Relating To Artificial Intelligence.
Hawaii's SB 640 (2025) would have added a part to HRS chapter 481B making it unlawful in a commercial transaction to use an AI chatbot that may mislead a reasonable person into thinking they are talking to a natural person unless a clear and conspicuous disclosure is given. Violations would be unfair or deceptive acts, with private suits (greater of $1,000 or treble damages), attorney general action and civil penalties up to $5,000,000. The Senate committees CPN and LBT deferred it February 7, 2025; it was carried over to 2026 with no further action and died.
Regulates use of artificial intelligence enabled video interview in hiring process.
New Jersey's A3911 would require an employer that asks applicants for video interviews and uses AI to analyze them to notify the applicant, explain how the AI works and what characteristics it evaluates, and obtain written consent first. Employers would have to delete interviews within 30 days of a request and report applicants' race and ethnicity data annually to the Department of Labor and Workforce Development. Violations would carry a $500 civil penalty for a first offense and $1,000 for each later one. Introduced February 27, 2024. A bill of the Legislature's 2024-2025 session, which ended January 13, 2026.
Artificial Intelligence Risk Evaluation Act of 2025
U.S. Congress's S. 2938, the Artificial Intelligence Risk Evaluation Act of 2025 (119th Congress), would require the Secretary of Energy to establish an Advanced Artificial Intelligence Evaluation Program. Developers of advanced AI systems (trained with more than 10^26 operations) would have to participate and give the Secretary requested materials, and could not deploy such a system in interstate or foreign commerce otherwise, with fines of at least $1,000,000 per day. It was referred to Senate Commerce on September 29, 2025; Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs held hearings September 30, 2026. It is pending in committee.
Prohibits the use of a facial recognition system by a landlord on any residential premises.
New York's S 2478 (2023-2024) would have added Real Property Law § 235-j making it unlawful for a landlord to obtain, retain, access or use on any residential premises a facial recognition system or information obtained from one. The Attorney General could seek an injunction and a civil penalty of not more than $10,000; affected people could sue for actual damages or $1,000, whichever is greater, plus attorneys' fees. Committed to Rules June 7, 2024 after Judiciary reported it; it died when the 2023-2024 session ended.
Artificial Intelligence Task Force; create and prescribe responsibilities of.
Mississippi's SB 2426 created the Artificial Intelligence Regulation (AIR) Task Force: two legislators as co-chairs plus the heads (or designees) of Information Technology Services, the Mississippi AI Network, Homeland Security, the National Guard and the Attorney General's office, with optional nonvoting experts. It drafts proposed revisions to the Mississippi Code on AI, reviews other states' and federal AI laws (privacy, testing, ethics, liability, bias, copyright), and recommends AI uses in state agencies. It reports by December 1 each year and dissolves December 31, 2027. Its meetings and findings are exempt from open meetings and public records laws. Effective March 18, 2025.
Deepfake pornography.
California's AB 621 rewrites Civil Code § 1708.86, the civil claim over sexually explicit deepfakes. A depicted person can sue anyone who creates and intentionally discloses, or intentionally discloses, digitized sexually explicit material (including images) when they know or reasonably should know the person did not consent or was a minor, and anyone who knowingly facilitates or recklessly aids or abets it. Deepfake pornography services and providers that keep them running after 30 days' notice face presumptions of liability. Statutory damages reach $50,000, or $250,000 if malicious, and prosecutors may sue. Signed October 13, 2025 (Chapter 673); effective January 1, 2026.
Transportation; allow and regulate autonomous vehicles.
Mississippi's SB 2569 (2023), the "Mississippi Fully Autonomous Vehicle Enabling (MS FAVE) Act of 2023," would, per its title, have authorized fully autonomous vehicles (SAE Level 4 or 5) to operate on public roads without a human driver while the automated driving system is engaged and certain conditions are met. This is the Senate-passed version; the House passed it as amended on February 23, 2023, but it died on the calendar on March 10, 2023.
AI LEAD Act Aligning Incentives for Leadership, Excellence, and Advancement in Development Act
The federal S. 2937 (AI LEAD Act) would make AI developers liable for harm if they fail to use reasonable care in design or warnings, breach an express warranty, or sell a defective and unreasonably dangerous product (strict liability for the last). Deployers would be treated as developers if they substantially modify or intentionally misuse a system. It would make contract terms that waive rights or unreasonably limit liability unenforceable, create a federal cause of action, set a 4-year limitations period, and require foreign developers to designate a U.S. agent. Introduced September 29, 2025 and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee; no further action.
Prohibits the use of biometric surveillance technology by law enforcement; establishes the biometric surveillance regulation task force; and provides for the expiration and repeal of certain provisions
Not law. S 1033 would have barred New York police officers, peace officers and police agencies, including the State Police, from using biometric surveillance systems such as facial recognition, with exceptions such as lawful DNA comparison, fingerprinting and internal security systems. A 12-member task force would have studied the technology's accuracy, effectiveness and harms, especially to vulnerable groups, and recommended whether and how police could use it. The bill was recommitted and its enacting clause stricken on February 21, 2025, which ends it. The Assembly version, A 1045, has its own page.
Online Internet Safety; certain disclosures related to conversational AI services; require
Georgia's AI companion chatbot law (Act 518, effective July 1, 2027). Operators must clearly disclose that users are talking to an AI, at the start and at least every three hours (hourly for minors or minor-directed bots). For known minors they must take reasonable measures to block sexual content, romantic role-play, encouraging secrecy or isolation, and manipulative engagement tactics. Every operator needs a self-harm crisis protocol with referrals such as 988, published in summary with yearly referral counts, plus parental tools and age assurance before any sexually explicit feature. The Attorney General enforces it, with penalties up to $10,000 per knowing violation.
AN ACT relating to crimes; expanding the crime of unlawful dissemination of an intimate image to include certain acts relating to the distribution of certain photorealistic images, digital images, computer images and computer-generated images; providing an exception to the crime of unlawful dissemination of an intimate image for persons who are less than 18 years of age; revising the definition of "intimate image"; providing penalties; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Nevada SB 213 brings AI deepfake nudes within the intimate-image law. "Intimate image" now includes photorealistic, digital, computer and computer-generated images that a reasonable person would believe show an identifiable person nude or in sexual conduct, and the public-figure exclusion is removed. Knowingly distributing such an image, made so it would be believed real, without the person's consent and with intent to harass, harm or terrorize, is a category D felony. Minors are exempt and offenders do not have to register as sex offenders.
Interim study to examine changes to state law regarding the use of artificial intelligence in political campaigns
Not a law. Nebraska LR412 (2024), introduced by Senator John Cavanaugh, is an interim study resolution that designated the Government, Military and Veterans Affairs Committee to study changes to state law on artificial intelligence in political campaigns, including First Amendment concerns, other states' laws, federal law, enforcement under the Political Accountability and Disclosure Act and civil remedies. The last official action was a hearing notice for September 19, 2024. A resolution does not change the law.
ELECTIONS/CAMPAIGNS: Requires disclosure of the use of artificial intelligence in telephone campaign communications
Louisiana's Act 559 requires a disclosure on campaign phone calls that use an AI-generated voice of a public figure. A telephone or automated call advocating for or against a candidate, elected official or ballot proposition that is created with AI using the voice of a public figure, including an elected official or limited public figure, must say clearly at the start that it was created using AI. Fines are up to $2,500, then $5,000 for later violations; the Board of Ethics enforces. Platforms, service providers and broadcasters aren't liable for others' content. Effective August 1, 2026.
Realigning Mobile Phone Biometrics for American Privacy Protection Act
The federal H.R. 7124 (Realigning Mobile Phone Biometrics for American Privacy Protection Act) would require the Secretary of Homeland Security, within 30 days after enactment, to develop standards and guidelines for DHS and its components that bar use of the Mobile Fortify and Mobile Identify mobile applications (and successors) except for identification at ports of entry, bar sharing them with other agencies, require their removal and remote disabling, and require destruction of images and fingerprints of U.S. citizens. Introduced January 15, 2026; referred to the House Homeland Security Committee and, January 16, to its Subcommittee on Border Security and Enforcement; no further action.
Protections for Youth on Social Media
Colorado's HB 26-1148 as introduced would add minor-protection duties for online gaming businesses (default privacy settings, an account-deletion tool, limits on using a minor's data to recommend media, a 5% fee on minors' add-on purchases) and would require social media platforms to disclose their algorithmic recommendation systems and bar using them to distribute illicit substances to minors. House Judiciary postponed it indefinitely 8-3 on April 7, 2026; it did not pass.
Relative to the use of artificial intelligence by state agencies.
New Hampshire's HB 1688 adds RSA chapter 5-D. State agencies may not use AI to classify people in ways that cause unlawful discrimination, use real-time remote biometric identification for public surveillance (except law enforcement with a warrant), or use deepfakes for deceptive or malicious purposes. Irreversible AI decisions need human review, generative AI material not reviewed by a human must be labeled, and users must be told when they interact with AI. Signed July 12, 2024 (Chapter 209); effective July 1, 2024.
SAFE BOTs Act Safeguarding Adolescents From Exploitative BOTs Act
The federal H.R. 6489 (SAFE BOTs Act) would require chatbot providers to tell users they know (or would know but for willful disregard) are under 17 that the chatbot is an AI system, not a person, at the first interaction and whenever asked, and to offer crisis hotline resources when the user raises suicide. Chatbots could not claim to be licensed professionals, and providers would need policies on break reminders after 3 hours and on harmful content. The FTC and state attorneys general would enforce it, and it would preempt state laws on the same matters. Pending in House Energy and Commerce.
AN ACT relating to data privacy, portability, and interoperability.
Kentucky's HB 559, the Kentucky Digital Choice Act (2026 session), would have given users of social media services and AI model operators data portability, deletion and interoperability rights. Companies and operators would have had to answer copy or deletion requests within five business days and offer open-protocol interoperability interfaces. Only the Attorney General could enforce it, with damages of up to $7,500 per continued violation after a 30-day cure period. It was referred to committee February 11, 2026 and died when the session ended.
Extends crime of identity theft to include fraudulent impersonation or false depiction by means of artificial intelligence or deepfake technology.
New Jersey's A3912 would extend the identity theft crime to impersonating or falsely depicting another person by means of AI or deepfake technology. A 'false personation record' is computer-generated or substantially manipulated media or text that appears to show a real person doing something they did not do, without consent, and is substantially likely to cause perceptible individual or societal harm. Grading follows the benefit or number of victims: fourth degree for one victim up to second degree for five or more. Introduced February 27, 2024. A bill of the Legislature's 2024-2025 session, which ended January 13, 2026.
Algorithm Accountability Act
The federal S. 3193 (Algorithm Accountability Act) would amend section 230 of the Communications Act to require a social media platform provider to exercise reasonable care in designing, training, testing, deploying, operating and maintaining a recommendation-based algorithm to prevent reasonably foreseeable bodily injury or death attributable to it. A provider that violates the duty would lose section 230(c)(1) protection, and injured people could sue for compensatory and punitive damages. Services with fewer than 1,000,000 registered users are excluded. Introduced November 18, 2025 and referred to the Senate Commerce Committee; no further action.
California Preventing Algorithmic Collusion Act of 2025.
California's SB 295 (2025-26 Regular Session), the California Preventing Algorithmic Collusion Act of 2025, would have barred a person from distributing, or making recommendations based on, a pricing algorithm to 2 or more competitors, under specified circumstances, if they knew or should have known it processes competitor data, and from using such recommendations. Civil penalty up to $25,000 per violation. The Senate passed it 29-10, but the Assembly refused passage 13-24 on September 13, 2025.
Requires AG to study use of artificial intelligence for certain law enforcement purposes and issue report.
New Jersey's A 5615 would have required the Attorney General to study law enforcement agencies' use of artificial intelligence to generate police reports and report to the Governor and Legislature within six months of the effective date. The report would assess available AI technology, summarize current use statewide and recommend a statewide policy requiring an officer to review any AI-generated report for accuracy and completeness before issuing it. Introduced May 5, 2025 and referred to the Assembly Public Safety and Preparedness Committee; it died in committee when the 2024-2025 session ended.
Requires AG to study law enforcement use of facial recognition technology and issue report with recommendations for Statewide policy.
New Jersey's A5616 would require the Attorney General to study law enforcement use of facial recognition technology and report to the Governor and Legislature within six months of the act's effective date. The report would include recommendations for a Statewide policy. Introduced May 5, 2025. A bill of the Legislature's 2024-2025 session, which ended January 13, 2026.
Extends crime of identity theft to include fraudulent impersonation or false depiction by means of artificial intelligence or deepfake technology.
New Jersey's S736 would extend the identity theft crime to impersonating or falsely depicting another person by means of AI or deepfake technology. A 'false personation record' is computer-generated or substantially manipulated media or text that appears to show a real person doing something they did not do, without consent, and is substantially likely to cause perceptible individual or societal harm. Grading follows the benefit or number of victims: fourth degree for one victim up to second degree for five or more. Pre-filed for the 2024 session. A bill of the Legislature's 2024-2025 session, which ended January 13, 2026.
Prohibits deepfake pornography and imposes criminal and civil penalties for non-consensual disclosure.
New Jersey's S976 would make it a third-degree crime to disclose deceptive audio or visual media (deepfakes) depicting sexual activity or intimate parts without the person's consent, with a fine of up to $30,000. It would also treat such media depicting a child as child sexual exploitation material with the same penalties as other such items, and give the depicted person a civil action in Superior Court with at least $1,000 liquidated damages per violation. Pre-filed for the 2024 session. A bill of the Legislature's 2024-2025 session, which ended January 13, 2026.
Prohibits creation or disclosure of deceptive audio or visual media, known as "deepfakes," under certain circumstances.
New Jersey's S2483 would make it a fourth-degree crime to create deceptive audio or visual media (deepfakes) without license or privilege and for an unlawful purpose, and a third-degree crime to disclose such media, knowing or reasonably should know it was unlawfully created, without clearly labeling it. A fine of up to $30,000 may be imposed for disclosure. The person depicted could sue for at least $1,000 in liquidated damages per violation. Introduced February 5, 2024. A bill of the Legislature's 2024-2025 session, which ended January 13, 2026.
Adopt the Agricultural Data Privacy Act and the Conversational Artificial Intelligence Safety Act
Nebraska's LB 525 creates the Conversational Artificial Intelligence Safety Act, operative July 1, 2027, and an Agricultural Data Privacy Act. Operators of public AI chat services must tell minors they are talking to AI, take reasonable measures to prevent sexual content and claims of being human, sentient or emotionally or romantically attached for minors, offer privacy and parental tools, disclose AI to anyone who could be misled, keep a suicide and self-harm referral protocol, and not claim to provide mental health care. The Attorney General enforces: at least $1,000 per violation, up to $500,000 per operator. Signed April 14, 2026.
Health care plans; to regulate the use of artificial intelligence in determinations of coverage
Alabama's SB 63 (Act 2026-589) limits how health benefit plan providers, including insurers, HMOs and utilization review contractors, use AI in prior authorization. AI-assisted medical necessity determinations must rest on the enrollee's medical history, clinical circumstances presented by the requesting provider and other information in the record, and any denial, delay or modification must be made by a licensed physician or other competent health care professional. Providers must certify their AI annually to the Department of Insurance, disclose its use and review its outcomes. Fines up to $5,000 for repeat violations. Signed April 16, 2026; effective October 1, 2026.
AN ACT relating to privacy protection.
Kentucky's HB 58 (2026) makes it unlawful for anyone, including the state and local governments, to use automated license plate readers (ALPRs: high-speed cameras plus data processing that turn vehicle and plate images into computer-readable data) except for listed purposes such as parking, secured-area access, public safety and auto theft, law enforcement, commercial vehicle enforcement and tolls. Captured data generally may not be kept over 90 days or sold or shared, with exceptions for police, insurers and lenders. Violations carry fines of $20 to $2,000, up to one year in jail, or both. Signed April 10, 2026 (Acts Ch. 71).
Relating to public safety; and declaring an emergency.
Oregon's 2026 public safety act (Chapter 77, in effect since it was signed on March 31, 2026) sets statewide rules for police use of automated license plate recognition (ALPR): cameras combined with computer algorithms that read plates and vehicle traits. Police may use ALPR only for listed purposes, must delete data not tied to a case or investigation within 30 days, log every search, publish their policies and their vendors' monthly audits, and may share data with non-Oregon agencies only for a specific law enforcement purpose. Vendors may not use, share or sell the data. The act also changes pretrial release and two state grant programs.
Data Privacy - Consumer Data, Public Records, and Message Switching System (Data Privacy Act)
HB711 prohibits the sale of consumer data to governmental units engaged in civil immigration enforcement unless required by law.
Regulates use of artificial intelligence enabled video interview in hiring process.
New Jersey's S3015 would require an employer that asks applicants for video interviews and uses AI to analyze them to notify the applicant, explain how the AI works and what characteristics it evaluates, and obtain written consent first. Employers would have to delete interviews within 30 days of a request and report applicants' race and ethnicity data annually to the Department of Labor and Workforce Development. Violations would carry a $500 civil penalty for a first offense and $1,000 for each later one. Introduced April 8, 2024. A bill of the Legislature's 2024-2025 session, which ended January 13, 2026.
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.
Reporting mechanism: child sexual abuse material.
California's AB 1946 amends the law on social media platforms and child sexual abuse material (Civil Code §§ 3273.65-3273.67, 3345.1). CSAM now includes intimate visual depictions of identifiable minors, including digital forgeries made with software, machine learning or AI. Any California user may report CSAM through a clear and conspicuous mechanism, not only people depicted; reports with no known hash match must get human review; reported CSAM must be blocked within 48 hours. Public prosecutors may seek up to $250,000 per day and depicted individuals may sue for damages. Signed September 10, 2026 (Chapter 185); effective January 1, 2027.
Urges generative artificial intelligence and content sharing platforms to make voluntary commitments to prevent and remove harmful content.
New Jersey Assembly Resolution 141 urges platforms used to generate and disseminate deepfake and cheapfake media to commit voluntarily to preventing and removing harmful content, and has copies sent to the chief executives of leading AI and content-sharing companies in the State. Its findings describe deepfakes and cheapfakes as artificially produced content used for libel, misrepresentation, blackmail, hacking and intimidation. The Assembly adopted it 74-1-1 on June 28, 2024. It is a resolution of one chamber that does not change the law.
Deepfake Political Advertising Regulation Amendment Act of 2024
The District of Columbia's B25-0832, the Deepfake Political Advertising Regulation Amendment Act of 2024, would have required campaign material containing AI-generated "artificial media" to carry a disclosure statement, barred knowingly distributing artificial media within 90 days of an election, and allowed injunctive relief and Campaign Finance Board civil fines. Introduced June 5, 2024 and referred to committee, it was not enacted and died when Council Period 25 ended.
Limiting the use of automatic registration plate readers, requiring a search warrant for data from an automatic registration plate reader or security camera, and providing a penalty.
Wisconsin's AB 576 would have banned use of automatic registration plate readers (devices that turn plate images into computer-readable data) except by parking facilities, for access control to enclosed non-public areas, and at weigh stations. It would also have barred law enforcement from using data from private security cameras or plate readers without a warrant, except in an emergency involving danger of death or serious injury. Introduced October 24, 2025 and referred to committee; it failed to pass March 23, 2026.
Automated Employment Decision Tools (AEDT) Law
New York City's Local Law 144 of 2021 bars employers and employment agencies from using an automated employment decision tool (AEDT) to screen candidates or employees for hiring or promotion in the city unless an independent auditor did a bias audit of it no more than one year before use and a summary of the results and the tool's distribution date are on their website. City residents must get notice at least 10 business days before use. Fines: up to $500 for a first violation, $500 to $1,500 for each subsequent one. Became law without the Mayor's signature in December 2021; effective January 1, 2023; the Department of Consumer and Worker Protection began enforcing it July 5, 2023.
Prohibits use and sale of algorithmic devices that set sale price of goods or services.
New Jersey's A 4685 (as introduced) would make it unlawful for a business entity to use, sell, distribute, develop, transfer or otherwise make available an algorithmic device, meaning software that uses algorithms on a consumer's personal data to recommend or set the sale price of goods or services. The Attorney General could sue for damages, injunctive relief, restitution and civil penalties up to $1,000 per violation. Introduced March 16, 2026 and referred to the Assembly Consumer Affairs Committee; it has not passed either house.
Colorado Artificial Intelligence Act
Colorado's SB 24-205 (the Colorado AI Act) covers high-risk AI that makes, or is a substantial factor in making, consequential decisions such as hiring, lending, housing, insurance and health care. Developers and deployers must use reasonable care against algorithmic discrimination; deployers need risk programs, impact assessments and notices. Signed May 17, 2024 (Chapter 198). Duties run from June 30, 2026 (SB 25B-004) until SB 26-189 replaces Part 17 on January 1, 2027. Under a stipulated April 27, 2026 order in X. AI LLC v. Weiser (D. Colo.), the Attorney General may not start enforcement over violations through 14 days after a ruling on xAI's planned preliminary-injunction motion.
"Social Media Fairness and Transparency Act"; establishes requirements for social media companies concerning content moderation practices; establishes cause of action against social media companies for violation of content moderation practices.
New Jersey's A4768, the Social Media Fairness and Transparency Act, would require large social media companies to publish their content-moderation standards and the keywords used to censor or prioritize posts, let users opt out of algorithmic post prioritization, and notify users when their content is censored. Violations would be consumer fraud violations, with a private right of action (up to $100,000 in statutory damages per claim). Introduced and referred to the Assembly Science, Innovation and Technology Committee on March 19, 2026; it has not passed either house.
MS Fully Autonomous Vehicle Enabling Act; extend repealer on law enforcement interaction plan submission to DPS.
Mississippi's SB 2269 keeps in force, until July 1, 2029, the rule that anyone operating a fully autonomous vehicle on public roads without a human driver must first submit a law enforcement interaction plan to the Department of Public Safety. The rule (Code § 63-35-7, from the 2023 MS FAVE Act) was set to be repealed July 1, 2026. The plan covers how to reach a fleet support specialist, how to safely remove and tow the vehicle, and how to tell whether it is in autonomous mode; without one, the Department may order the vehicle off public roads. Approved March 13, 2026 (Chapter 330); effective July 1, 2026.
Concerning the use of facial recognition services.
Washington's Chapter 257, Laws of 2020 (ESSB 6280) governs state and local government use of facial recognition services (chapter 43.386 RCW). Before use, an agency must give notice to its legislative authority and publish an accountability report after public comment and community meetings. Decisions with legal or similarly significant effects require meaningful human review; services must be tested in operational conditions and vendors must allow independent accuracy and bias testing. Ongoing surveillance, real-time identification and persistent tracking need a warrant, exigent circumstances or a court order. The governor vetoed section 10 (a task force). Effective July 1, 2021.
MARRIAGE ACT-EVIDENCE
Illinois's SB 3901 (104th General Assembly) would add subsection (c-5) to Section 105 of the Illinois Marriage and Dissolution of Marriage Act, requiring a court, notwithstanding any other law, to review evidence in proceedings under that Act under Supreme Court Rule 901 to evaluate whether proposed evidence may have been generated by AI. Last action: re-referred to Assignments May 22, 2026.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 28 and Title 39, Chapter 17, relative to the unauthorized use of deepfake or actual likeness.
Tennessee's SB 1346, the Preventing Deepfake Images Act (Tenn. Code § 39-17-1901 et seq.), lets a person shown in an intimate digital depiction (a realistic digitally created or altered image appearing to show them nude or in sexual conduct) sue anyone who intentionally discloses it knowing, or recklessly disregarding, that they did not consent. Remedies: the defendant's gains, actual or $150,000 liquidated damages, punitive damages and fees. Disclosing or threatening to disclose one to harass or harm is a Class E felony (Class C if reasonably expected to affect a government proceeding or election, or to facilitate violence). Signed May 9, 2025 (Public Chapter 466); effective July 1, 2025.
Prohibits the use of biometric surveillance technology by law enforcement; establishes the biometric surveillance regulation task force; and provides for the expiration and repeal of certain provisions
New York's S 5609 (same as A 1045) would add Executive Law §§ 837-y and 236 to bar police agencies, police officers, peace officers and the state police from acquiring, possessing, accessing, installing, activating or using biometric surveillance systems (such as facial recognition) or information derived from them. A 12-member task force would study whether to allow police use. Reported from the Senate Internet and Technology Committee and committed to Codes February 25, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Defining synthetic media in campaigns for elective office, and providing relief for candidates and campaigns.
Chapter 360, Laws of 2023 addresses election deepfakes. Synthetic media is an image, audio or video of a person's appearance, speech or conduct intentionally manipulated with generative adversarial network techniques or other digital technology to create a realistic but false depiction with a fundamentally different impression than the original. A candidate depicted in synthetic media in an electioneering communication can seek an injunction and sue the sponsor for damages. A set-format disclosure that the media "has been manipulated" is an affirmative defense. The sponsor, not the medium, is liable unless the medium removes the disclosure or alters the content. Now chapter 29B.35 RCW.
Trade: business regulation; availability of companion chatbots to minors; prohibit. Creates new act.
Michigan's SB 760, the 'leading ethical AI development for kids act', would bar operators of advanced chatbots from offering companion-style and other harmful design features unless they know the user is not a minor (under 18), and limit their use of minors' data. The Attorney General could seek a civil fine of $25,000 per violation, and harmed minors could sue. The Senate passed it 20-17 on April 29, 2026 and it was referred to the House Committee on Communications and Technology.
Relating to the use of artificial intelligence in campaign communications; declaring an emergency.
Oregon's SB 1571 requires any campaign communication (one supporting or opposing a clearly identified candidate or measure, at any spending level) that includes synthetic media to carry a disclosure that the image, audio or video has been manipulated. Synthetic media is an individual's image, audio or video intentionally manipulated with AI or similar digital technology into a realistic but false depiction that changes a reasonable person's understanding. The Secretary of State, or the Attorney General for Secretary of State races, may seek injunctions, and courts impose civil penalties up to $10,000. Signed March 27, 2024 (Chapter 62, Oregon Laws 2024); effective on signing.
ALGORITHMIC PRICING
Illinois's HB 4544 would create the Preventing Algorithmic Pricing Discrimination Act. Anyone who knowingly advertises personalized algorithmic pricing based on a person's consumer data would have to state that the price was set by an algorithm using the person's personal data, and pricing could not use protected class data to deny or vary offers. Filed January 22, 2026; referred to the House Rules Committee January 30, 2026 (co-sponsor added February 18, 2026); it has not passed either house.
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.
Relating To Traffic Safety.
Hawaii's HB 1231 (Act 212 of 2025) bars photo red light imaging detector systems and automated speed enforcement systems from using or being equipped with facial recognition software or biometric identification technology. Automated license plate readers and non-biometric technology used to verify vehicle identity or registration or to produce photographic evidence of a violation are exempt. It also requires each county to impose a $5 motor vehicle registration surcharge for the safe routes to school program by December 31, 2025, and revises the mailing rules for speed camera citations. Became Act 212 June 25, 2025; effective on approval.
VEH CD-LICENSE PLATE READERS
Illinois's SB 3320 (103rd General Assembly) would have amended Section 2-130 of the Illinois Vehicle Code on automated license plate readers (ALPR), which use computer algorithms to convert plate images into searchable data. It would have set retention and access limits on ALPR detections held by State law enforcement. Died at Session Sine Die on January 7, 2025.
Provides that a person may operate a fully autonomous vehicle on the public roads of this state without a human driver provided that the automated driving system is engaged and the vehicle meets certain conditions; defines terms; requires insurance and that such vehicle is registered as a fully…
New York's S 344-B would add Vehicle and Traffic Law Article 34-E allowing a fully autonomous vehicle (10,000 pounds or less gross weight, with two distinct sensing modalities) to operate without a human driver while its automated driving system is engaged. Operators must file a law enforcement interaction plan with the DMV and show proof of insurance or self-insurance, and the owner is liable for traffic violations while the system is engaged. Amended and recommitted to Transportation May 6, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Health insurance
Not law. S. 920 would have required South Carolina health insurers that use AI, algorithms or other software for prior authorization to base decisions on the patient's own medical history and clinical circumstances, have a licensed physician or other qualified professional make every denial, reduction or deferral, tell enrollees that AI is used, certify yearly that their tools are fair and non-discriminatory, and share denial rates on request, with Department of Insurance enforcement. The Senate Banking and Insurance Committee reported it favorably on April 30, 2026, but it was never taken up before the regular session ended.
Imposes liability for damages caused by a chatbot impersonating certain licensed professionals
New York's A 6545-C would add General Business Law section 390-f. Chatbot operators could not knowingly let a chatbot impersonate a practitioner of certain licensed professions or an attorney in a way that would be a crime or unauthorized practice if done by a person, and would have to give users clear notice that they are talking to an AI chatbot. Referred to the Rules Committee May 28, 2026, then reported and ordered to third reading on the Assembly floor calendar (Rules Report cal. 294) June 1, 2026; the Assembly never voted on it, and it has not passed either house.
Use of Surveillance Technology by Law Enforcement
Colorado's SB26-071, the Surveillance Accountability and Freedom Ensured (SAFE) Act, would have set rules for law enforcement surveillance technology, including facial recognition systems, which could be used only after a warrant or in exigent circumstances with an imminent public-safety threat. The requirements would apply from July 1, 2027. The Senate Judiciary Committee postponed it indefinitely 6-1 on May 6, 2026; it is dead.
Requires state units to purchase a product or service that is or contains an algorithmic decision system that adheres to responsible artificial intelligence standards; specifies content included in responsible artificial intelligence standards; requires the commissioner of taxation and finance to…
New York's A 5216 would add State Finance Law § 165(10) requiring state units buying a product or service that is or contains an algorithmic decision system to purchase one that adheres to responsible AI standards (harm avoidance, transparency, fairness, evaluation), with the tax commissioner adopting regulations, and would amend Executive Law § 292(4) so unlawful discriminatory practices include acts performed through an algorithmic decision system. Would take effect on January 1 next succeeding enactment. Referred to Governmental Operations February 12, 2025 and January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Adopt the Conversational Artificial Intelligence Safety Act
Not law as a stand-alone bill. Nebraska LB1185 would have enacted the Conversational Artificial Intelligence Safety Act, requiring chatbot operators to disclose they are AI, add protections for minor account holders, and keep a suicide and self-harm protocol, enforced by the Attorney General. LB1185 was indefinitely postponed April 17, 2026, but its provisions were amended into LB525 (AM2444), which the Governor approved April 14, 2026, with the chatbot act operative July 1, 2027.
AN ACT RELATING TO COMMERCIAL LAW--GENERAL REGULATORY PROVISIONS -- ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE COMPANION MODELS
Rhode Island's AI companion law, effective January 1, 2027, applies to operators of AI companions: AI that simulates a sustained human-like relationship by remembering users, asking unprompted emotional questions and keeping up a personal dialogue. Operators must have a protocol for addressing possible suicidal ideation, self-harm or physical harm to others expressed by a user, with a referral to crisis services when detected, and must tell users at the start of an interaction and every three hours that they are not talking to a human. From July 1, 2027 operators file annual reports with the Attorney General, who enforces with penalties up to $15,000 a day. Signed June 22, 2026.
An act relating to the use of synthetic media in elections
Vermont's S.23 (Act 75) bars publishing, communicating or distributing, within 90 days before a Vermont election, synthetic media the person knows is deceptive and fraudulent unless it states: "This media has been manipulated or generated by digital technology and depicts speech or conduct that did not occur." Synthetic media is image, audio or video of a person created or intentionally manipulated with digital technology, including AI. Knowing and intentional violations: fines up to $1,000; $5,000 with intent to cause violence; $10,000 for a repeat within five years; $15,000 for both. Depicted candidates may seek injunctions. Signed and effective March 5, 2026.
Imposes liability for misleading, incorrect, contradictory or harmful information to a user by a chatbot that results in financial loss or other demonstrable harm.
New York's A 10494 would have added General Business Law § 390-f barring a chatbot proprietor (an entity with more than twenty employees) whose chatbot serves as an alternative to a human representative from disclaiming liability when the chatbot gives “materially misleading, incorrect, contradictory or harmful information” causing financial loss or other demonstrable harm, unless it cured the harm within thirty days of notice. Clear notice that users face an AI chatbot was also required. Referred to Consumer Affairs and Protection May 29, 2024; it died at the end of the 2023-2024 session.
Provides that a person may operate a fully autonomous vehicle on the public roads of this state without a human driver provided that the automated driving system is engaged and the vehicle meets certain conditions; defines terms; requires insurance and that such vehicle is registered as a fully…
New York's S 1012-B (2023-2024 session) would have added Vehicle and Traffic Law Article 34-E allowing a person to operate a fully autonomous (SAE level 4 or 5) vehicle on public roads without a human driver while its automated driving system is engaged, subject to conditions, a law enforcement interaction plan, proof of insurance and registration as a fully autonomous vehicle. The state would have governed these vehicles exclusively, with any city of five million or more people able to set local for-hire rules. It was referred to the Transportation Committee and last amended March 1, 2024; it did not pass, and the session ended without action.
Includes "deep fake" images created by digitization within the definition of unlawful dissemination or publication of an intimate image.
New York's S 1042-A extends the crime of unlawful dissemination or publication of an intimate image (Penal Law § 245.15), a class A misdemeanor, to images created or altered by digitization, meaning realistically altered using images of another person or computer-generated images. It is a crime to intentionally disseminate or publish, with intent to harm a person's emotional, financial or physical welfare, an image of that identifiable person with intimate parts exposed or engaged in sexual conduct with another person, when the actor knew or reasonably should have known the person did not consent. Signed September 29, 2023 (Chapter 513); effective November 28, 2023.
Prohibits the use of biometric surveillance technology by law enforcement; establishes the biometric surveillance regulation task force; provides for the expiration and repeal of certain provisions.
New York's S 1609 (2023-2024) would have added Executive Law sections 837-x and 236 prohibiting police agencies, officers, peace officers and State Police members from acquiring, possessing, accessing or using a biometric surveillance system, or information derived from one. Exceptions covered mobile fingerprint scanning, the State DNA index and the statewide fingerprint system. It also created a Task Force on the Regulation of Biometric Surveillance. Reported and committed to Codes May 7, 2024, it died when the 2023-2024 session ended.
Establishes criteria for the use of automated employment decision tools; provides for enforcement for violations of such criteria.
New York's S 5641-A (2023-24 session, Sen. Comrie) would have added Labor Law article 20-D on automated employment decision tools (AI that is the controlling factor in a decision to hire, promote or terminate). Deployers and developers would have had to perform annual impact assessments and keep an AI governance program, and deployers to notify affected individuals; the Attorney General could investigate and would give 45 days' notice to cure. Referred to Labor March 10, 2023 and amended and recommitted to Labor January 8, 2024; it died when the session ended.
An Act relating to defamation claims based on the use of deepfakes; and relating to the use of deepfakes in electioneering communications.
Not law. HB 358 passed the Alaska House 38-2 on May 9, 2024. It would have made a defamation claim based on a deepfake defamation per se and barred knowingly using a deepfake in an electioneering communication to influence an election. People harmed could sue creators, knowing distributors or anyone who stripped a disclosure; a clear 'has been manipulated' label was a defense, and platforms and broadcasters carrying others' ads were not liable. The Senate Judiciary Committee rewrote it on May 13, 2024, but it died when the session ended.
Requires disclosure of the use of artificial intelligence in political communications; directs the state board of elections to create criteria for determining whether a political communication contains an image or video footage created through generative artificial intelligence and to create a…
New York's S 7592-A (2023-2024) would have amended Election Law section 14-106 to require any political communication that uses an image or video generated wholly or partly with artificial intelligence to carry the statement "THIS COMMUNICATION WAS GENERATED USING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE", with a fine equal to the amount spent on the communication for failure to disclose. The State Board of Elections would set criteria and a definition. Amended February 26, 2024, it died in Elections when the 2023-2024 session ended.
Requires the collection of oaths of responsible use from users of certain generative or surveillance advanced artificial intelligence systems by the operators of such systems, and transmission of such oaths to the attorney general.
New York's S 8206 (2023-2024) would have added General Business Law section 394-cccc requiring operators of generative or surveillance advanced AI systems accessible to New York residents to require an account and, before account creation, collect from each user an oath under penalty of perjury not to use the system for the four listed harmful purposes. Operators must send each oath to the Attorney General within 30 days. Referred to Internet and Technology January 12, 2024, it died when the 2023-2024 session ended.
Consumer Protection - Workgroup on Artificial Intelligence Implementation
Maryland's HB 956 creates the Workgroup on Artificial Intelligence Implementation: legislators, the Attorney General, the Maryland Technology Development Corporation CEO and appointed industry, academic, labor, civil rights, privacy, consumer and cybersecurity representatives. It monitors and makes recommendations on AI, including regulating AI used in decisions that significantly impact people's livelihood and life opportunities, developer and deployer obligations, consumer rights and disclosures, Attorney General enforcement and AI in government benefit decisions, and reports yearly from July 1, 2026. Approved April 22, 2025 (Chapter 105); effective July 1, 2025; ends June 30, 2029.
Enacts the New York artificial intelligence bill of rights to provide residents of the state with rights and protections to ensure that any system making decisions without human intervention impacting their lives do so lawfully, properly, and with meaningful oversight.
New York's S 8209 (2023-2024) would have added State Technology Law Article IV (§§ 401-409), the New York artificial intelligence bill of rights. New York residents would have rights to safe and effective automated systems, protection from algorithmic discrimination, data privacy, notice and explanation, and a human alternative. Operators violating the rights would be liable for a penalty of not less than three times the damages caused, enforced by the Attorney General; there is no private right of action. Referred to Internet and Technology January 12, 2024; it died when the 2023-2024 session ended.
AN ACT RELATING TO COMMERCIAL LAW--GENERAL REGULATORY PROVISIONS -- ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE COMPANION MODELS
Rhode Island's AI companion law, effective January 1, 2027, applies to operators of AI companions: AI that simulates a sustained human-like relationship by remembering users, asking unprompted emotional questions and keeping up a personal dialogue. Operators must have a protocol for addressing possible suicidal ideation, self-harm or physical harm to others expressed by a user, with a referral to crisis services when detected, and must tell users at the start of an interaction and every three hours that they are not talking to a human. From July 1, 2027 operators file annual reports with the Attorney General, who enforces with penalties up to $15,000 a day. Signed June 22, 2026.
Provides relative to the use of artificial intelligence in political campaigns
Louisiana's HB 459 (Act 806) bars making an electioneering communication portraying a candidate or an elected official subject to recall that AI was used to create, alter or digitally manipulate so it would falsely appear to a reasonable observer to be an authentic record of their actual speech or conduct and to replace an individual's likeness with theirs, without a clear, understandable disclosure that it was made using AI. A violation intended to injure their reputation or deceive a voter carries a fine up to $2,000, up to two years in prison, or both. Media entities that broadcast paid ads they had no input in or control over are exempt. Signed June 9, 2026; effective August 1, 2026.
Imposes liability for misleading, incorrect, contradictory or harmful information to a user by a chatbot that results in financial loss or other demonstrable harm.
New York's S 9381 (2023-2024) would have added General Business Law section 390-f on chatbots. A proprietor with more than twenty employees that uses a chatbot in place of a human representative could not disclaim liability for materially misleading, incorrect, contradictory or harmful information causing financial loss or other demonstrable harm, with no liability if cured within 30 days of notice, and must give clear notice users are talking to an AI chatbot. Referred to Internet and Technology May 14, 2024; it died when the 2023-2024 session ended.
Provides relative to unlawful conduct involving images of another person created by artificial intelligence (REF SEE FISC NOTE GF EX)
Louisiana's HB 119 (Act 782), the Ivy Daniels Act, makes it a crime to possess an AI-created video or image of a person under 17 who is nude or has intimate areas exposed, when the possessor knows or has reason to know they are not authorized to have it: up to five years, at least one without parole, probation or suspension. Unlawful dissemination or sale of AI-created images of another now carries up to one year, a fine up to $1,000, or both, or up to five years if the person depicted is under 17. Educators who victimize students may face an additional two years. Public schools must inform students in grade 6 and up and their parents yearly. Signed June 9, 2026; effective August 1, 2026.
Requires the owner, licensee or operator of a generative artificial intelligence system to conspicuously display a warning on the system's user interface that is reasonably calculated to consistently apprise the user that the outputs of the generative artificial intelligence system may be…
New York's S 9450-A (2023-2024) would have added General Business Law § 399-zzzzzz requiring the owner, licensee or operator of a generative AI system to conspicuously display a warning on its user interface that outputs may be inaccurate and/or inappropriate. The penalty would have been the lesser of $25 per user or $100,000, with each calendar year of a continuing violation a separate violation. The Senate passed S 9450-A 61-0 on June 6, 2024; in the Assembly it was substituted for A 10103-B and ordered to third reading on the Rules calendar (cal. 512), but the Assembly never voted on it and it died when the 2023-2024 session ended.
LABOR: Provides relative to the use of automated decision systems with respect to employment decisions (OR INCREASE GF EX See Note)
Louisiana's HB 421 would have regulated employers' use of automated decision systems in employment decisions: written notice to workers at least 30 days before first use, bans on facial, gait and emotion recognition, no sole reliance on an automated system for discipline, termination or deactivation, human review, and worker appeals. Louisiana Works could cite violators ($500 civil penalty) and workers could sue. It was referred to committee March 9, 2026 and died.
Provides relative to the regulation of artificial intelligence (OR +$256,243 GF EX See Note)
Louisiana's HB791, the People's A.I. Act, would have regulated AI chatbot providers: consent before processing personal data or training on chat logs, no selling chat logs, a ban on using chat logs for ads, notices that the user is talking to a chatbot, monthly risk assessments, and treating chatbots as products for liability. The Attorney General or a district attorney could enforce and users could sue. It was referred to House Commerce March 9, 2026 and died.
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.
TO CREATE THE CRIMINAL OFFENSE OF UNLAWFUL CREATION OR DISTRIBUTION OF DEEPFAKE VISUAL MATERIAL; AND TO ESTABLISH A CAUSE OF ACTION FOR UNLAWFUL CREATION OF DEEPFAKE VISUAL MATERIAL.
Arkansas Act 827 of 2025 makes it a crime to knowingly create or distribute, without consent, realistic deepfake images or video showing an identifiable person nude or engaged in sexual conduct: a Class A misdemeanor for a first offense and a Class D felony after that. The Attorney General may sue providers or developers of prompt-based image generation tools used to make such material if they lacked reasonable safeguards, and injured people may sue the tool provider or whoever caused the deepfake, recovering damages and attorney's fees. Approved April 17, 2025; effective August 5, 2025.
Prohibits deepfake pornography and imposes criminal and civil penalties for non-consensual disclosure.
Not law. A 1892 would have made it a crime in New Jersey to disclose sexually explicit deepfakes of a person without consent, with the same penalty as nonconsensual 'revenge porn' (a third-degree crime: 3 to 5 years and up to $15,000), and would have punished deepfakes depicting the sexual abuse of a child like child sexual abuse material. People depicted could also sue for invasion of privacy. The Assembly Science, Innovation and Technology Committee approved it 7-0 on March 4, 2024, but it got no further action before the 2024-2025 session ended. Its Senate twin was S 976.
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.
Artificial Intelligence Modifications
Utah's HB 276 enacts two AI laws. The Digital Voyeurism Prevention Act bars AI image generation services from distributing counterfeit intimate images of a real person without verified consent, requires covered platforms to remove reported images within 48 hours, and lets victims sue, subject to safe harbors. The Digital Content Provenance Standards Act requires large online platforms to show content provenance data and generative AI providers with over 1,000,000 monthly users and capture-device makers (devices made for sale from 2028) to embed latent disclosures; fines up to $2,500 per violation. Signed March 24, 2026; effective January 1, 2027.
Amends existing law to revise a provision regarding video voyeurism and to revise a penalty for disclosing explicit synthetic media.
Idaho's H 727 (2026 Session Laws Chapter 121) amends two sex-crime laws. Video voyeurism (§ 18-6605), a felony, covers disseminating, publishing or selling, or threatening or conspiring to do so, an identifiable person's intimate image to harass or degrade. Disclosing explicit synthetic media (§ 18-6606), meaning images or videos created or altered with AI or other technical means to realistically show a person in sexual conduct or nude, is a misdemeanor but a felony (up to 10 years, $25,000 or both) if the person shown is under 18 or for a repeat offense within five years. Signed March 25, 2026; effective July 1, 2026.
Relating to the regulation of automated motor vehicles; creating a criminal offense.
Political campaign advertisements; synthetic media, penalty.
Vetoed. Virginia's HB 2479 (2025) would have barred sponsoring an electioneering communication (a paid message naming a candidate, aimed at voters within 60 days of the election) containing synthetic media, meaning deceptively altered or AI-generated images or audio of an identifiable person, unless it conspicuously stated that it contains synthetic media that may present conduct or speech that did not occur. Violations would have carried civil penalties up to $25,000 and, if willful, a Class 1 misdemeanor; voters could have sued to stop the ads. Governor Youngkin vetoed it (March 24, 2025), and the House sustained the veto April 2, 2025.
Commerce and Trade; private entities that employ certain AI systems to guard against discrimination caused by such systems; provide
Georgia's SB 167 would add a new Chapter 16 to Title 10 regulating automated decision systems used for consequential decisions (education, employment, essential government services, financial or lending services, healthcare, housing, insurance and legal services). Developers could not make available a system that results in algorithmic discrimination and would have to provide information to the Attorney General. According to its title, deployers would also have duties, and the Attorney General would enforce. The bill was read and referred on February 13, 2025 and died when the session ended.
CHATBOT RESPONSE LIABILITY ACT
Illinois's SB 3368 (104th General Assembly) would create the Chatbot Response Liability Act. A chatbot proprietor could not disclaim liability when its chatbot gives materially misleading, incorrect, contradictory or harmful information resulting in financial loss, other demonstrable harm or bodily harm to the user or a third party, would have to give clear notice that users are talking to AI, and would face companion chatbot rules including parental consent for minors. Re-referred to Assignments May 22, 2026.
AI PRODUCT LIABILITY ACT
Illinois's SB 3590 would create the Artificial Intelligence Product Liability Act. In product liability actions over high-impact or generative AI systems, a developer would be liable only if the plaintiff establishes the elements listed in Sec. 15: failure to use reasonable care in design, in instructions or warnings, and in an express warranty, causing harm. Deployers would be treated as developers if they materially change the product or intentionally misuse it. Filed February 5, 2026; re-referred to Assignments May 22, 2026; it has not passed either house.
Unleashing AI Innovation in Financial Services Act
U.S. Congress's H.R. 4801, the Unleashing AI Innovation in Financial Services Act (119th Congress), would require each federal financial regulatory agency to set up an AI Innovation Lab where regulated financial entities could apply to run AI test projects under waived or modified regulations and an alternative compliance strategy. The Financial Services Committee ordered it reported, as amended, 33-19 on May 13, 2026. It was reported June 24, 2026 and awaits House action.
Relating To Algorithmic Discrimination.
Hawaii's SB 59 (2025) would have added an Algorithmic Discrimination chapter. Covered entities (those holding data on more than 25,000 residents, over $15,000,000 in receipts, data brokers, or service providers) could not use algorithmic processes using machine learning, AI or similar techniques to decide eligibility for credit, insurance, education, employment, housing or public accommodations in a discriminatory way, and would owe notices, annual audits and reports. Penalties up to $10,000 per violation, plus private suits. Referred January 16, 2025 and carried over to 2026, it died.
Health insurance
South Carolina's Bill S0920 requires health insurers to consider factors like bias and transparency when using AI, mandates disclosures about AI usage to enrollees, and details disciplinary actions such as fines or license suspensions for violations.
Relating To Artificial Intelligence.
Hawaii's HB 2137 (Act 247 of 2026) adds a new HRS chapter making it unlawful to knowingly publish a realistic digital imitation (a highly realistic AI-generated depiction, audio or video of a real person's voice, face or likeness in a work they did not perform in) without the person's express written consent if it is used in an advertisement, causes harm, or is used for fraud, defamation, harassment or other crimes. Parody, satire, commentary, news and documentaries are exempt. The person or their estate (up to 10 years after death) may sue for an injunction, up to $25,000 per advertisement or actual damages, punitive damages if malice is proven, and fees. Act 247; effective July 14, 2026.
Consumer Protection Artificial Intelligence Bill of Rights.
HR 1177 is a nonbinding North Carolina House resolution urging Congress to preserve the state's authority to regulate harmful uses of AI in consumer protection, to let state agencies keep full investigative and enforcement powers, and to oppose federal moratoria that would stop states from enforcing their laws against AI-enabled fraud and deceptive practices. It was filed April 30, 2026 and referred to the House Rules Committee on May 4, 2026.
An Act to Regulate and Prevent Children's Access to Artificial Intelligence Chatbots with Human-like Features and Social Artificial Intelligence Companions
Not law. Maine's LD 2162 would have regulated AI chatbots and social AI companions offered to minors in Maine. As amended by committee amendment C-A, which both chambers adopted, deployers would have had to keep chatbots' human-like features and social AI companions away from minors starting February 15, 2027, and maintain systems to detect, respond to, report and mitigate situations where a minor indicates an intent to harm themselves or others. The Attorney General could seek civil penalties up to $2,500 per violation ($7,500 if intentional), and minors could sue. The bill died on adjournment April 29, 2026.
Artificial intelligence; definitions; requiring operators make certain disclosure; preventative measures for minor account holders; prohibitions; enforcement authority to Attorney General; civil penalty. Effective date.
Not law. SB 1521 would have required operators of public conversational AI services to tell minor users they are talking to AI, through a constantly visible disclaimer or at the start and every 30 minutes, prevent statements suggesting a human for minor accounts, offer minors no engagement rewards, never present the AI as providing professional mental health care, and refer users expressing suicidal ideation to crisis services. The Attorney General could seek $1,000 per violation, capped at $500,000 per company. The Senate (43-0) and House (90-0) passed different versions, but the Senate never voted on the House amendments, so it died with the session.
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.
Campaign finance: advertising; using artificial intelligence in certain political advertisements; require disclosure. Amends sec. 47 of 1976 PA 388 (MCL 169.247) & adds sec. 59. TIE BAR WITH: HB 5143'23
Michigan's HB 5141 (Public Act 263 of 2023) requires whoever creates, originally publishes or originally distributes a qualified political advertisement (a paid ad about a Michigan candidate, election or ballot question with image, audio or video generated in whole or substantially with AI) to state clearly and conspicuously that it was generated in whole or substantially by AI, with size, timing and language rules for print, audio and video. Fines: up to $250 for a first violation, up to $1,000 for each later one. AI-generated political robocalls need a disclaimer. Approved November 30, 2023; effective February 13, 2024.
Enacts into law major components of legislation necessary to implement the state transportation, economic development and environmental conservation budget for the 2025-2026 state fiscal year; relates to the waterfront commission act; makes amendments to change "applicant" to "licensee or…
New York's 2025-26 budget bill (Chapter 58 of 2025) includes two AI laws. Part U requires operators of AI companions (AI that simulates a sustained human-like relationship) to make reasonable efforts to detect and address suicidal ideation or self-harm and refer users to crisis services such as 988, and to tell users at the start of an interaction and every three hours that they are not talking to a human; the Attorney General can seek up to $15,000 a day (in effect since November 5, 2025). Part X requires businesses using personalized algorithmic pricing to show 'THIS PRICE WAS SET BY AN ALGORITHM USING YOUR PERSONAL DATA' (since July 8, 2025).
Senate Substitute for HB 2313 by Committee on Federal and State Affairs - Prohibiting the use of the artificial intelligence platform DeepSeek and other artificial intelligence platforms controlled by a country of concern on state-owned devices and on any state network and the use of genetic sequencers or operational software used for genetic analysis that is produced in a foreign adversary.
Kansas's Senate Substitute for HB 2313 (2025) bars using state-owned or state-issued devices to access DeepSeek or any AI model controlled, directly or indirectly, by a country of concern (China including Hong Kong, Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Russia, Venezuela; Taiwan excluded). State agency networks must block these platforms and agencies must delete existing accounts; law enforcement and cybersecurity investigations are exempt. It also bars state-funded medical and research facilities from using genetic sequencers or analysis software from a foreign adversary. Approved April 8, 2025; it takes effect on its publication in the statute book.
"Prohibition of Exploitation by Deepfakes Act"; enact.
Mississippi's SB 2437 (2025), the "Prohibition of Exploitation by Deepfakes Act," would have made it unlawful to use an interactive computer service to knowingly publish intimate visual depictions, including AI-made "morphed images," of identifiable individuals in certain circumstances. Per its title it would also have required covered platforms to run a notice-and-removal process. It was referred to Judiciary, Division B on January 20, 2025, and died in committee on February 4, 2025.
Prohibits creation or disclosure of deceptive audio or visual media, known as "deepfakes," under certain circumstances.
New Jersey's S3305 would make it a fourth-degree crime to create deceptive audio or visual media (deepfakes) without license or privilege for an unlawful purpose, and a third-degree crime to disclose such media without clearly identifying it as deceptive, with a fine up to $30,000. The depicted person could sue for at least $1,000 liquidated damages per violation. Introduced February 2, 2026.
Establishes criminal penalties for production or dissemination of deceptive audio or visual media, commonly known as "deepfakes."
New Jersey's A 3540 (P.L.2025, c.40) makes it a third-degree crime for a person, without license or privilege, to create a deepfake (deceptive audio or visual media) to attempt or further any crime or offense, or to solicit, disclose or use one for that purpose; knowingly or recklessly disclosing a deepfake made in violation is a fourth-degree crime. A fine of up to $30,000 may be added, sentences must run consecutively with the underlying offense, and victims may sue for at least $1,000 per knowing or reckless violation. Approved April 2, 2025; effective immediately.
Consumer Protection - Artificial Intelligence Toys (Artificial Intelligence Toy Safety Act)
Maryland's HB 1261 (2026, the Artificial Intelligence Toy Safety Act, first reader text) would have set rules for toys that use AI and are marketed to or mainly used by children: no sexual, violent or emotionally manipulative content, verified parental consent, limits on child data, pre-sale and annual safety assessments, AI labels, and a civil penalty up to $50,000 per violation plus mandatory recall. It had a House Economic Matters hearing set for March 3, 2026 and died when the 2026 session ended.
Establishes the position of chief artificial intelligence officer and such person's functions, powers and duties; including, but not limited to, developing statewide artificial intelligence policies and governance, coordinating the activities of any and all state departments, boards, commissions…
New York's A 1205 would amend the State Technology Law to create a chief artificial intelligence officer, appointed by the Governor with the advice and consent of the Senate, who would set state AI and automated decision-making policy, coordinate agencies' AI use, audit that use, recommend deactivating harmful applications and report annually to the legislature. It would also create an Advisory Committee for State Artificial Intelligence Policy. Referred to Governmental Operations January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Relating To Artificial Intelligence.
Hawaii's Senate Bill 2923 (2026), the Hawaii Artificial Intelligence Safety and Regulation Act, would have created an Office of Artificial Intelligence Safety and Regulation attached to the Department of Commerce and Consumer Affairs for administrative purposes and barred anyone from deploying AI products in the State without first submitting affirmative proof of safety. The office would have applied a precautionary principle, and violators would have faced civil fines (amount left blank) in actions by the Attorney General or the Office of Consumer Protection. It was referred to committees January 30, 2026 and not enacted.
Artificial intelligence technology.
Vetoed. California's SB 11 would have required anyone offering consumers AI technology that can create a digital replica to post, by December 1, 2026, a warning that unlawful use to depict another person without consent may bring civil or criminal liability, with civil penalties up to $10,000 a day. It would also have counted digital replicas as a voice or likeness under the right-of-publicity law, treated impersonation by digital replica as false impersonation, and had the Judicial Council address AI-generated evidence by January 1, 2027. Vetoed by Governor Newsom October 13, 2025; veto sustained March 2, 2026.
Impersonation of certain licensed professionals by chatbot; definitions, notice, civil liability.
Virginia's HB 669 (2026 Regular Session) would have barred chatbots from acting as licensed professionals. As introduced, a chatbot proprietor could not let a chatbot give responses or take actions that would be the unlicensed practice of fields such as medicine, nursing, dentistry, psychology or law. It failed: left in House Appropriations Committee on February 18, 2026.
GUARD Act Guidelines for User Age-verification and Responsible Dialogue Act of 2026
The federal S. 3062 (GUARD Act) would require AI chatbot providers to verify that users of AI companions are adults and bar minors from them, require AI and non-professional disclosures, and make it a crime to knowingly or recklessly make publicly available a chatbot that engages minors in sexually explicit conduct or solicits them to suicide, self-injury, violence or homicide (fines up to $250,000 per offense). Reported by the Judiciary Committee with a substitute May 11, 2026 and placed on the Senate calendar (Calendar No. 406); it has not passed either chamber.
Crimes and punishments; sexual obscenity; making certain acts unlawful; effective date.
Oklahoma's HB 1364 (2025) adds AI-made sexual images to the crime of nonconsensual dissemination of private sexual images. An artificially generated sexual depiction is an image that appears to authentically show a person nude or in sexual conduct that did not happen, produced mainly by technical means such as artificial intelligence or photo editing software. Sharing one of another person without their effective consent, intending or recklessly disregarding that it will harass, threaten or cause physical, emotional, reputational or economic harm, is a misdemeanor; sharing three or more within six months is a felony punishable by up to ten years. Effective November 1, 2025.
An act relating to regulating the use of artificial intelligence in the provision of mental health services
Vermont's H.644 (2026) would have barred anyone from offering, providing or advertising mental health services in Vermont that use AI in whole or in part, and barred mental health professionals from using AI for therapeutic decisions or communications, treatment plans, or detecting emotions. AI could be used for administrative support and, with written notice and consent, transcription. Violations of the ban would have been Consumer Protection Act violations carrying a $10,000 civil penalty each. Referred to House Health Care January 13, 2026; died. Senate companion S.241 also died.
An act relating to regulating the use of artificial intelligence in the provision of mental health services
Vermont's S.241 (2026) would have barred anyone from offering, providing or advertising mental health services in Vermont that use AI in whole or in part, and barred mental health professionals from using AI for therapeutic decisions or communications, treatment plans, or detecting emotions. AI could be used for administrative support and, with written notice and consent, transcription. Violations of the ban would have been Consumer Protection Act violations carrying a $10,000 civil penalty each. Referred to Senate Health and Welfare January 13, 2026; died. A House companion, H.644, also died.
Providing for disclosures and safeguards relating to the use of artificial intelligence; and imposing duties on the Attorney General.
Pennsylvania's SB 1090 (2025-26), the Safeguarding Adolescents from Exploitative Chatbots and Harmful AI Technology Act (Printer's No. 1423), would require operators of AI companion platforms to disclose nonhuman status, maintain suicide and self-harm protocols, and apply safeguards for minors. The Attorney General could seek civil penalties up to $10,000 per violation. It passed the Senate 49-1 on March 17, 2026 and was referred to the House Communications & Technology Committee on March 18.
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.
Fostering Access, Innovation, and Responsibility in Artificial Intelligence Act; established.
Virginia's SB 365 (2026 Regular Session) would create the FAIR AI Act. A developer of a base AI model would have to disclose in its terms of service the model's name, developer, incorporation location, release date and other listed items; the disclosure would not be a defense to liability. Continued to 2027 in committee on February 4, 2026.
Identity Protection Modifications
Utah SB 256 (2026) applies defamation law to deepfakes and strengthens likeness rights. It is not a defense to libel or slander that content was created with generative AI, computer animation or digital manipulation. Before suing over digitally created content, a plaintiff must give the publisher written notice, and removal within 10 days limits recovery to actual damages. It establishes an exclusive right to consent to use of one's identity and extends the Abuse of Personal Identity Act, as amended by 2025 SB 271, to distributing or trafficking in identity-replication tools, with exemptions. Effective May 6, 2026.
Employment decisions; automated decision systems, civil penalty.
Virginia's HB 1514 (2026 Regular Session) would have regulated automated decision systems used in employment decisions. State agencies using one as a substantial factor would have had to ensure legal compliance, disclose its use, offer an opt-out, test it annually and train staff, and no employer could make a final employment decision without a human decision maker. It failed: left in House Appropriations Committee on February 18, 2026.
Regulates the use of artificial intelligence in aiding decisions on rental housing and loans; requires a study on the impact of artificial intelligence and machine learning on housing discrimination and redlining.
New York's A 3930 would regulate algorithms in housing and lending. Landlords and banks using automated decision tools to screen applicants would need annual disparate impact analyses, 24-hour notice to applicants, and (landlords) public posting of results; landlords could not use pricing algorithms with nonpublic competitor data to set rent. Tenants could sue for damages. The housing agency would study AI and housing discrimination. Would take effect immediately. Referred to Housing January 30, 2025 and January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Disclosure of Intimate Images
South Carolina's H. 3058 (Act No. 37 of 2025) creates the crime of unauthorized disclosure of intimate images (S.C. Code §§ 16-15-330, 16-15-332), covering real images and "digitally forged intimate images" made or substantially modified with machine learning or other computer means, even if labeled as fake. Intentionally sharing one without the person's effective consent is a felony if meant to cause harm or for profit (first offense up to $5,000 and/or 5 years; later offenses up to $10,000 and/or 1 to 10 years) and otherwise a misdemeanor for a first offense. Signed May 12, 2025; effective on approval.
Law-enforcement agencies; use of certain technologies & interrogation practices; forensic lab.
Virginia's HB 1257 (2026 Regular Session) would direct the Department of Criminal Justice Services to set a framework for law-enforcement use of generative AI, machine learning systems and audiovisual surveillance technologies and for interrogations, with model policies and training. Continued to 2027 in committee on February 2, 2026.
AI Fraud Accountability Act
The federal H.R. 7786 (AI Fraud Accountability Act) would make it a federal crime, in interstate or foreign communications, to pose in a "digital impersonation" (an AI- or software-generated image, video or audio indistinguishable from a real person) with intent to defraud someone of money or anything of value, punishable by a fine and up to 3 years in prison, with a parallel FTC-enforced ban. Introduced March 4, 2026 and referred to House committees; no further action.
Creates penalties for likenesses altered or created by artificial intelligence being used for commercial gain; establishes a private right of action for the unlawful dissemination of still or video images generated by artificial intelligence.
New York's S 8721 would add Civil Rights Law § 50-h, barring use of a person's likeness altered or created by software, machine learning or AI for products, merchandise, advertising or solicitation without prior consent, with liability of the greater of $2,000 or compensatory damages plus profits. It would also add § 52-e, a private right of action over dissemination of digitized private images. Referred to Codes January 7, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
No Robot Bosses Act
The federal H.R. 6371 (No Robot Bosses Act) would bar employers from relying exclusively on an automated decision system for an employment-related decision, and from using its output unless it was tested before use and at least annually for discrimination, disclosed to the individual, overseen by a human, explained in writing within 7 days and open to dispute and appeal. Employees could opt out of being managed by such a system. Enforcement would be by the Labor Secretary, private lawsuits and State attorneys general. Introduced December 3, 2025 and referred to three House committees; no further action.
Relating To The Patients' Bill Of Rights.
Hawaii's Senate Bill 3027 (2026), which calls itself the Hawaii Patients' Bill of Rights of 2025, would have set prior authorization deadlines for health carriers (one business day urgent, three non-urgent) and required written disclosure of any automated decision support tool used in utilization review. A board-certified clinician would have had to independently approve any adverse action the tool materially contributed to. It was referred to committee January 30, 2026 and not enacted. It would have taken effect July 1, 2026.
State Emergency Medical Services Board - Public Access Automated External Defibrillator Program - Revisions
HB276 revises the Public Access Automated External Defibrillator Program by establishing AED coordinator requirements, repealing regional council AED committees, and exempting AEDs in certain law enforcement patrol vehicles. It also sets certification qualifications for grocery stores and restaurants.
Regulates the development and use of certain artificial intelligence systems to prevent algorithmic discrimination; requires independent audits of high risk AI systems; provides for enforcement by the attorney general as well as a private right of action.
New York's S 1169-B would regulate high-risk AI systems used in consequential decisions on employment, education, housing, health, finance and legal services. Developers and deployers would have to take reasonable care against algorithmic discrimination, commission independent audits, file reports and keep a risk management program; social scoring AI would be banned. The Senate passed it June 3, 2026 and delivered it to the Assembly; it has not passed the Assembly.
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.
Artificial Intelligence Civil Rights Act of 2025
The AI Civil Rights Act would bar companies from developing or using AI-driven 'covered algorithms' in decisions about jobs, education, housing, utilities, health care, credit, insurance, criminal justice, elections, government benefits or public accommodations in a way that causes a disparate impact or otherwise discriminates based on a protected characteristic. Where harm is plausible, an independent auditor must evaluate the algorithm before deployment, and deployers must assess impacts every year, with summaries made public. The FTC would set rules for human alternatives and appeals. Enforced by the FTC, state attorneys general and private lawsuits. Introduced December 2, 2025.
Facial Recognition Act of 2025
The federal H.R. 4695 (Facial Recognition Act of 2025) would let officers use facial recognition with a reference photo database only under a court order lasting no more than 7 days, or narrow emergency exceptions. It would ban face surveillance and use for immigration enforcement, bar a match as the sole basis for probable cause, require NIST accuracy testing and audits, exclude evidence from violations and allow suits for the greater of profits or $50,000 per violation. Introduced July 23, 2025 and referred to the House Judiciary and Science, Space, and Technology committees; no further action.
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.
Law Enforcement - Use of Facial Recognition Technology - Images Captured in Dwelling Interior
Maryland's HB 756 (2026, first reader text) would have added an exception to Criminal Procedure section 2-503 letting law enforcement use facial recognition technology on still or video images captured by a camera inside a dwelling to investigate arson, burglary and trespass offenses. It had a House Judiciary hearing set for February 24, 2026 and died when the 2026 session ended.
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.
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.
Fourth Amendment Restoration Act
West Virginia's HB 4682, the Fourth Amendment Restoration Act (2026 regular session), would have barred law enforcement officers, and anyone acting for law enforcement purposes, from using seven listed technologies, including facial recognition, license plate readers and surveillance drones, unless a warrant based on probable cause authorizes use against a specific person. Knowing and willful use would be a felony. It was sent to House Judiciary on January 21, 2026 and died when the session ended March 14, 2026.
Criminal Law - Identity Fraud - Artificial Intelligence and Deepfake Representations
Maryland's Chapter 445 of 2026 adds AI and deepfakes to the state's identity fraud law. Knowingly, willfully and with fraudulent intent using AI or a deepfake (a realistic image, video or audio of an actual, identifiable person) to impersonate, falsely depict or claim to represent someone to cause harm, or to create or distribute false records to cause harm, get personal identifying information or get something of value, is a felony: up to 5 years and $10,000 with one victim, 10 years and $15,000 with two or more. Victims can sue for an injunction and other relief. Effective October 1, 2026.
Preventing Deepfakes of Intimate Images Act
The federal H.R. 1941 (Preventing Deepfakes of Intimate Images Act) would let the subject of a digitally manipulated intimate depiction sue anyone who discloses it without consent, with $150,000 in liquidated damages, and make it a federal crime to disclose or threaten to disclose one with intent to harass or to cause harm: up to 2 years in prison, or up to 10 in certain cases. Introduced March 6, 2025 and referred to the House Judiciary Committee; no further action.
DEFIANCE Act of 2025 Disrupt Explicit Forged Images And Non-Consensual Edits Act of 2025
The federal H.R. 3562 (DEFIANCE Act of 2025) would amend 15 U.S.C. 6851 to let an identifiable individual sue over an "intimate digital forgery": a sexually intimate depiction made with software, machine learning or AI that a reasonable person could not tell from a real one. Liquidated damages would be $150,000, or $250,000 if tied to sexual assault, stalking or harassment. Introduced May 21, 2025 and referred to the House Judiciary Committee; no further action.
Artificial intelligence; age verification systems required for chatbots, safeguard protocols required, therapy chatbot requirements established, private right of action and enforcement provided for
Alabama's HB 324, as introduced, would require AI chatbot deployers to verify the age of every user, keep chatbots with human-like features away from minors (under 19) or offer minors a version without them, adopt protocols for users who express intent to harm themselves or others, and limit the data they collect and store. It would allow licensed psychiatrists to prescribe qualifying therapeutic chatbots to minors, with a private right of action and Attorney General enforcement. Referred to House Judiciary January 22, 2026; the bill died when the 2026 regular session ended without final passage.
Consumer Protection and Product Liability - Chatbots
Maryland's SB 827 (2026, first reader text, cross-filed with HB 1250) would have regulated operators and developers of generative AI chatbots made available to Maryland users: affirmative consent for training on input data, a ban on using chat logs for advertising, a 10-year cap on chat log retention, protections for users under 13, hourly not-human warnings, monthly safety testing, and product liability with possible strict liability. It had a Senate Finance hearing set for March 12, 2026 and died when the 2026 session ended.
QUIET Act Quashing Unwanted and Interruptive Electronic Telecommunications Act
The QUIET Act (H.R. 1027) would amend the Communications Act of 1934 to require anyone making a robocall or sending a robotext who uses AI to emulate a human being to disclose at the start that AI is being used. It would also double the maximum forfeiture and criminal fine when AI is used to impersonate an individual or entity with intent to defraud, cause harm or wrongfully obtain anything of value. Referred to the House Energy and Commerce Committee on February 5, 2025; it has not passed either house.
QUIET Act Quashing Unwanted and Interruptive Electronic Telecommunications Act
The federal S. 3354 (QUIET Act) would amend Section 227 of the Communications Act of 1934 to require anyone making a robocall or robotext who uses AI to emulate a human to disclose at the beginning that AI is being used, and would double the maximum forfeiture and criminal fine for violations in which AI is used to impersonate a person or entity to defraud, cause harm or wrongfully obtain something of value. Referred to the Senate Commerce Committee December 4, 2025; it has not passed either chamber.
Creates a temporary state commission to study and investigate how to regulate artificial intelligence, robotics and automation; repeals such commission.
New York's A 3361 would create a temporary 14-member "New York state artificial intelligence, robotics and automation commission" to study how to regulate AI, robotics and automation, including liability, employment impact, confidential information, weaponry and public-sector uses. Members serve without compensation. A final report is due 30 days before the act expires on December 31, 2026. Passed the Assembly and was delivered to the Senate January 28, 2026 (it had also passed May 12, 2025 and died in the Senate January 7, 2026); it has not passed the Senate.
Requires search engines inform users when showing information which was generated using artificial intelligence.
New York's A 9091 would add General Business Law § 399-ss. When a search engine displays information generated by artificial intelligence, it would have to tell the user, in clear, plain language in the same font size as the information, that it was AI-generated, both directly above the information and as a watermark across it. A violation would be punishable by a civil penalty not to exceed $5,000. Would take effect on the ninetieth day after it becomes law. Introduced September 12, 2025, referred to the Consumer Affairs and Protection Committee and held for consideration there May 5, 2026; it has not passed either chamber.
Custodial interrogations; false statements to a child prohibited, inauthentic replica documents.
Virginia's HB 2692 amends Code § 16.1-247.1 to bar law-enforcement officers from knowingly and intentionally making false statements about known material facts, including by using inauthentic replica documents, before or during a custodial interrogation of a child to secure the child's cooperation, confession or conviction. Inauthentic replica documents include computer-generated documents created by any means, including AI. If an officer knowingly violates the rule, the child's statements are inadmissible in a delinquency or criminal proceeding against the child unless the prosecution proves they were made knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily. Chapter 669; effective July 1, 2025.
Synthetic digital content; definition, penalty, report, effective clause.
Virginia's HB 2124 (2025) would treat AI-made synthetic digital content that realistically but falsely depicts a person as "words" under the insulting-words, defamation-mitigation and criminal slander laws, and make using it for the purpose of a fraud crime a separate Class 1 misdemeanor, with a civil claim for the person depicted. Those changes needed reenactment by the 2026 General Assembly, which did not reenact them, so they are not in the Code of Virginia. The act also had the Attorney General convene a work group, which reported in January 2026. Approved March 24, 2025 (Chapter 398); identical to SB 1053.
Synthetic digital content; definition, penalty, report, effective clause.
Virginia's SB 1053 (2025) would treat AI-made synthetic digital content that realistically but falsely depicts a person as "words" under the insulting-words, defamation-mitigation and criminal slander laws, and make using it for the purpose of a fraud crime a separate Class 1 misdemeanor, with a civil claim for the person depicted. Those changes needed reenactment by the 2026 General Assembly, which did not reenact them, so they are not in the Code of Virginia. The act also had the Attorney General convene a work group, which reported in January 2026. Approved March 24, 2025 (Chapter 407); identical to HB 2124.
VEH CD-ALPR-RECORD RETENTION
Illinois's SB 3257 (104th General Assembly) would amend Section 2-130 of the Illinois Vehicle Code on automated license plate readers (ALPRs), redefining an ALPR as a camera or system using computer algorithms to convert plate images into searchable data. Law enforcement could retain detection records for 5 years, with archiving after 90 days. Last action: re-referred to Assignments May 22, 2026.
"Walker Montgomery Protecting Children Online Act"; establish to protect minors from harmful content.
Mississippi's HB 1126 (Chapter 45, Laws of 2024), the Walker Montgomery Protecting Children Online Act, mainly sets age-registration, data and harm-mitigation rules for digital services. Its AI-relevant part amends Section 97-5-31 so that the child exploitation crimes cover morphed images: any visual depiction, including a computer or computer-generated image, made or produced by electronic, mechanical, simulated or other means, that has been created, adapted or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct. Approved April 30, 2024; effective July 1, 2024.
AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 33; Title 47 and Title 63, relative to mental health.
Tennessee's HB 1470 was enacted as its Senate companion, SB 1580 (Public Chapter 647): the House substituted SB 1580 for HB 1470 on March 16, 2026. The law adds Tenn. Code § 33-1-205: a person who develops or deploys an artificial intelligence system may not advertise or represent to the public that the system is, or is able to act as, a qualified mental health professional. A violation is an unfair or deceptive act under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act of 1977, subject to its penalties and remedies, and carries a civil penalty of $5,000 per violation. Signed April 1, 2026 (Public Chapter 647); effective July 1, 2026.
Law Enforcement Usage of Artificial Intelligence
Utah SB 180 (2025) requires each law enforcement agency to have a policy on employees' use of generative AI, covering approved tools, permitted tasks, review of AI output and discipline for violations. A police report or other law enforcement record created wholly or partly with generative AI must carry a disclaimer that it contains AI-generated content, and the author must certify that they read and reviewed it for accuracy. The act defines artificial intelligence and generative AI. Effective May 7, 2025.
An act relating to use of facial recognition technology by law enforcement in cases involving sexual exploitation of children
Vermont's H.195 (Act 17 of 2021) makes a narrow exception to the 2020 moratorium on police facial recognition (Act 166 of 2020, Sec. 14). Law enforcement may use facial recognition technology during a criminal investigation into sexual exploitation of children under 13 V.S.A. chapter 64, but only to search for images, including video, of a victim, potential victim or identified suspect within electronic media legally seized in that investigation. The act took effect on passage; the Governor signed it May 4, 2021.
Provides disparate impact based on automated decision system as cause of action for certain consumers.
New Jersey's S 4279 (as introduced) would bar a covered entity (lender, housing provider, screening company, creditor, servicer, insurer or their agents) from using an automated decision system in housing or credit decisions in a way that results in a disparate impact on a protected class, a violation of the Law Against Discrimination. It would require impact assessments at least every two years, notice and human review on request, and would let the Division on Civil Rights or Attorney General impose fines of at least $5,000 for certain violations. Introduced May 14, 2026 and referred to the Senate Commerce Committee; not passed.
State-by-State Regulation of AI Liability & Legal Responsibility
Artificial intelligence regulation is advancing at the state level. This page lists the 698 published bills we track on AI Liability & Legal Responsibility. State attorneys general, privacy regulators, and legislatures are developing a patchwork of laws that impose different obligations on businesses deploying AI systems related to this topic. Compliance teams and legal counsel must track both enacted laws and the pipeline of pending bills that could shift requirements at any time.
Obligations differ from bill to bill. Depending on the law, they can include consumer disclosure obligations, prohibition on specific high-risk uses, mandatory algorithmic impact assessments, bias audits, rights to explanation, and human override requirements. Penalties for non-compliance vary by state — use our Penalty Tracker to review enforcement provisions. For upcoming effective dates, see the Deadlines page.
To understand how AI Liability & Legal Responsibility laws intersect with specific industries, browse our Healthcare, Employment, Insurance, and Financial Services industry trackers. Compare how different state laws approach this topic using our Bill Comparator.