USLege Legislative Intelligence

An AI Overview of the United States

How all 50 states are governing artificial intelligence — scored on a single AI-Friendliness Index, with every bill's AI summary, the legislators driving and resisting AI in each state, and verified hearing clips.

This report distills 50 states and 241 curated AI bills pulled live from USLege. Use the left nav to jump to any state. Each state shows a transparent score breakdown, an AI-ally vs AI-skeptic legislator map, a business-impact readout, and every bill as a click-to-expand AI summary. 39 states include a titled, logo-watermarked hearing clip.
National Overview
53
Avg AI-Friendly Index
17 friendly · 13 restrictive
28
States w/ comprehensive AI bills
AI-Act-style frameworks
~28
Enacted / signed measures
of 241 tracked
39
Verified hearing clips
titled · USLege logo
Tier distribution.
Very Friendly 4 · Friendly 13 · Balanced 18 · Cautious 4 · Very Restrictive 9 (+2 no-data).
Partisan pattern. Of tracked restrictive (Oppose) bills, 74 are sponsored by Democrats and 26 by Republicans. Of enabling (Support) bills, 43 are Republican-sponsored and 15 Democratic — restriction skews blue, enablement skews red, though both parties appear on both sides (child-safety and healthcare-AI limits draw bipartisan support).
AI-Friendliness Map
Very Friendly 70+Friendly 60-69Balanced 45-59Cautious 35-44Very Restrictive <35No data
Each state shaded by its AI-Friendliness Index. Hover for the score; click a state to jump to its detail.
Alaska — 64/100 (Friendly) Alabama — 52/100 (Balanced) Arkansas — 68/100 (Friendly) Arizona — 52/100 (Balanced) California — 48/100 (Balanced) Colorado — 28/100 (Very Restrictive) Connecticut — 34/100 (Very Restrictive) Washington, DC (not scored) Delaware — 68/100 (Friendly) Florida — 58/100 (Balanced) Georgia — 68/100 (Friendly) Hawaii — 42/100 (Cautious) Iowa — 48/100 (Balanced) Idaho — 74/100 (Very Friendly) Illinois — 24/100 (Very Restrictive) Indiana — 68/100 (Friendly) Kansas — 54/100 (Balanced) Kentucky — 62/100 (Friendly) Louisiana — 50/100 (Balanced) Massachusetts — 30/100 (Very Restrictive) Maryland — 38/100 (Cautious) Maine — 40/100 (Cautious) Michigan — 47/100 (Balanced) Minnesota — 28/100 (Very Restrictive) Missouri — 55/100 (Balanced) Mississippi — 58/100 (Balanced) Montana — no data North Carolina — 42/100 (Cautious) North Dakota — 74/100 (Very Friendly) Nebraska — 52/100 (Balanced) New Hampshire — 62/100 (Friendly) New Jersey — 56/100 (Balanced) New Mexico — 62/100 (Friendly) Nevada — no data New York — 33/100 (Very Restrictive) Ohio — 52/100 (Balanced) Oklahoma — 63/100 (Friendly) Oregon — 68/100 (Friendly) Pennsylvania — 45/100 (Balanced) Rhode Island — 32/100 (Very Restrictive) South Carolina — 58/100 (Balanced) South Dakota — 66/100 (Friendly) Tennessee — 52/100 (Balanced) Texas — 62/100 (Friendly) Utah — 78/100 (Very Friendly) Virginia — 48/100 (Balanced) Vermont — 30/100 (Very Restrictive) Washington — 34/100 (Very Restrictive) Wisconsin — 58/100 (Balanced) West Virginia — 68/100 (Friendly) Wyoming — 72/100 (Very Friendly) AK AL AR AZ CA CO CT DE FL GA HI IA ID IL IN KS KY LA MA MD ME MI MN MO MS MT NC ND NE NH NJ NM NV NY OH OK OR PA RI SC SD TN TX UT VA VT WA WI WV WY
State-by-State Detail

Utah UT

Very Friendly · Flagship: SB 226
78
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Pairs the nation's first AI Policy Act, an Office of AI Policy, and a learning-lab sandbox with mostly targeted disclosure rules — highly innovation-permissive despite active legislating.
Score breakdown Net index 78/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 1 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Businesses using generative AI in consumer-facing financial, legal, medical, or mental-health services must conspicuously disclose AI use upfront or face Consumer Protection enforcement; a safe harbor is available.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Kirk Cullimore (R)
Senate Business and Labor • SB 226
“When we passed requirements about consumer interactions with AI bots, it might have been a little bit broad last year. This narrows disclosure to high-risk interactions.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Kirk Cullimore R
Sen. · SB 226
Disclosure with safe harbor; extends the AI Policy Act. Signed.
Pitcher D
Sen. · SB 180
AI-generated police reports need disclaimer and review. Signed.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Doug Fiefia R
Rep. · HB 438
Safety protocols and reporting for companion chatbots.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 226AI Consumer Protection AmendmentsSupport

SB 226 enacts a framework for generative AI in consumer transactions and regulated services, requiring upfront disclosure during high-risk interactions like financial, legal, medical, and mental-health advice, with liability under consumer-protection law and a safe harbor for conspicuous disclosure.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Cullimore (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 332Artificial Intelligence RevisionsSupport

SB 332 extends the repeal (sunset) date of Utah's AI Policy Act from May 2025 to July 2027 — a clean two-year extension prolonging the existing framework without new provisions.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Cullimore (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 452AI mental-health chatbot frameworkMonitor

HB 452 creates a framework for AI-based mental-health chatbots, mandating disclosure that users are interacting with AI and restricting how personal information is used, with Division of Consumer Protection enforcement and an affirmative defense for compliance.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Moss (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 180Law Enforcement Usage of AIMonitor

SB 180 requires law-enforcement agencies to adopt policies governing personnel use of generative AI; any police report created with generative AI must carry a disclaimer and an author certification of review, effective May 2025.

Government Use · Sponsor: Pitcher (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 438AI Companion Chatbot Safety ActOppose

HB 438 (AI Companion Chatbot Safety Act) sets consumer-protection requirements for companion-chatbot suppliers, focused on minors — mandating safety protocols, monitoring, public reporting, and data-sharing restrictions.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Fiefia (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Idaho ID

Very Friendly · Flagship: SB 1067
74
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Strongly pro-innovation — a bill declaring AI free speech and barring government constraint, plus AI used to cut red tape; only narrow chatbot/education rules temper the score.
Score breakdown Net index 74/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 1 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Idaho favors AI businesses: SB 1067 blocks AI regulation, while SB 1227, SB 1297, and HB 203 impose targeted disclosure, education, and algorithmic-pricing compliance duties.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Ben Toews (R, Dist. 4)
Senate State Affairs • Feb 20, 2026 • SB 1297
“This bill creates the Conversational AI Safety Act… it requires clear and conspicuous disclosure that the user is dealing with AI.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Idaho Commerce Cmte R
Cmte · SB 1067
Bars government from constraining AI; protected-speech framing.
Ways & Means
Committee · HB 917
Directs agencies to use AI to streamline regulations.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
State Affairs
Committee · SB 1297
Disclosure, suicide protocols, minor protections. Delivered to Governor.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 1067AI as free speech; regulation limitsSupport

SB 1067 classifies AI as protected free speech and a general-purpose technology, barring Idaho governmental entities from regulating AI development, training, or deployment, to maximize innovation.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Commerce Cmte (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 917AI Regulatory Review Act to cut red tapeSupport

HB 917 (AI Regulatory Review Act) requires agencies to use advanced AI to scan regulations for redundancy, cost, and clarity, with human experts reviewing recommendations before adoption.

Government Use · Sponsor: Ways & Means (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 1227Generative AI framework for K-12Monitor

SB 1227 directs the education department to build a statewide generative-AI framework for K-12, with district policies, training, and procurement rules, protecting student data.

Education · Sponsor: Education Cmte (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 1297Conversational AI Safety ActOppose

SB 1297 (Conversational AI Safety Act) requires public chatbots to disclose they are AI, respond to suicidal-ideation prompts, and avoid posing as mental-health professionals, effective 2027.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: State Affairs (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 203Ban collusive pricing algorithmsMonitor

HB 203 amends the Idaho Competition Act to ban pricing algorithms enabling collusion among buyers or sellers, with private causes of action and enhanced damages, exempting market research.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: State Affairs (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

North Dakota ND

Very Friendly · Flagship: HB 1167
74
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Mostly enabling or narrow: autonomous-technology adoption grants and study bills dominate; the only broad restrictions are a single passed political-AI disclosure and a deepfake ban that failed.
Score breakdown Net index 74/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Few binding private-sector mandates
2 enabling/Support bills · 0 restrictive/Oppose bills · 3 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Businesses using AI in political ads must add clear disclaimers; deepfake and autonomous-vehicle restrictions stalled, leaving a lighter burden, while robotics/UAV vendors face new warrant and data-retention rules.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. Austen Schauer (R)
House Floor • Apr 2, 2025 • HB 1167 (passed 90-0)
“HB 1167 relates to AI disclosure statements in political communications… the content generated by artificial intelligence will now be capitalized. HB 1167 is a step forward.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Jared Hagert R
Rep. · HB 1249
Adoption grants for autonomous tech; enabling (failed).
Hendrix R
Rep. · HB 1614
Light-touch AV study framework (failed).
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
No clearly identified AI skeptics on the record.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 1167AI disclosure for political deepfakesMonitor

HB 1167 requires political content created with AI to impersonate human visuals or audio to carry a prominent 'CONTENT GENERATED BY ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE' disclaimer, exempting minor uses like grammar tools. Signed into law after passing 90-0.

Deepfakes/Elections · Sponsor: Warrey (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1249Autonomous technology grants for agenciesSupport

HB 1249 would appropriate one-time funding for autonomous-technology grants across state agencies for 2025-2027 and order a study on costs and economic impact. Failed second reading 42-50.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Hagert (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1614DOT study of autonomous vehiclesSupport

HB 1614 directs the DOT to study autonomous and semiautonomous vehicle technologies during the interim, covering infrastructure, liability rulemaking, and data privacy. Failed second reading 2-43.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Hendrix (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1320Prohibit deepfake videos and imagesMonitor

HB 1320 would create a class A misdemeanor for intentionally producing or distributing AI-generated or altered deepfakes of a person without consent and with intent to deceive. Failed second reading 17-69.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Christy (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1613Limits on law-enforcement robots/dronesMonitor

HB 1613 updates law on law-enforcement use of robots and drones, requiring warrants for surveillance except in specified exceptions, limiting weaponized use, and mandating documentation and data retention. Enacted.

Government Use · Sponsor: Hendrix (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Wyoming WY

Very Friendly · Flagship: HB 102
72
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Enabling overall — only a narrow enacted deepfake/CSAM crime law and a failed government social-scoring ban — with no private-sector mandates and an emerging-tech committee focused on attracting industry.
Score breakdown Net index 72/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Few binding private-sector mandates
2 enabling/Support bills · 0 restrictive/Oppose bills · 3 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Telecom, social media, and streaming platforms gain liability exemptions for third-party content but face new criminal exposure for AI-generated synthetic sexual material and must navigate political-speech censorship limits.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Laura Pavy (Moms for Liberty of Wyoming)
House Education • Feb 13, 2026 • HB 102
“Across the country, schools have already faced incidents where AI tools have been used to generate explicit images of their own classmates. This is a present reality, not a future fear.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Jayme Lien R
Rep. · HB 102
Criminalizes AI CSAM; limits developer liability. Enacted.
Mike Yin D
Rep. · HB 91
Would bar government AI social scoring; failed.
Rep. · HB 17
Emerging-tech committee to attract technology companies; failed.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
No clearly identified AI skeptics on the record.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 102Protecting kids from deepfakes/exploitative imagesSupport

HB 102 establishes criminal offenses for AI misuse — especially synthetic sexual material involving children, promotion of self-harm, and AI-driven censorship of political speech — while limiting AI-developer liability and barring AI as a defense for crimes. Signed as Chapter 91.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Lien (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 91Ban government social scoring with AIMonitor

HB 91 prohibits Wyoming government entities from using AI to assign social scores or to identify persons via biometric data without consent, with constitutional exceptions, effective July 2026. Failed to advance.

Government Use · Sponsor: Yin (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 17Select Committee on Blockchain & Emerging TechSupport

HB 17 renames the blockchain select committee to the Select Committee on Blockchain and Emerging Technologies, refining its duties to promote Wyoming's digital-economy leadership and reduce barriers for technology companies.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: — · Open bill on USLege →
HB 160Digital Taxonomy ActMonitor

HB 160 (Digital Taxonomy Act) establishes a legal framework for classifying digital assets on distributed ledger technology, defining jurisdictional nexus and legal characterization to provide clarity. Died in committee.

Data/Privacy · Sponsor: Singh (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 43Anti-money launderingMonitor

HB 43 establishes money-laundering and illegal-investment offenses, criminalizing transacting property derived from crime and structuring to evade reporting. Signed as Chapter 89; tangential to AI-enabled financial fraud.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: — · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Arkansas AR

Friendly · Flagship: HB 1958
68
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Enacted only narrow, enabling AI laws — government human-in-the-loop policy, AI-output ownership, deepfake/CSAM rules — while a comprehensive algorithmic-discrimination regime died.
Score breakdown Net index 68/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 2 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Arkansas AI companies face no broad mandate (SB 258 died); they get pro-innovation IP-ownership rules but must keep humans in the loop for public-sector and CSAM-risk use cases.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Josh Bryant, expert for Sen. Penzo (R)
Senate Transportation, Technology & Legislative Affairs • Mar 3, 2025
“This bill only regulates high-risk AI systems. Your ChatGPTs, it doesn't apply… doesn't apply to Claude. It only applies to high-risk systems.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Stephen Meeks R
Rep. · HB 1958
Keeps a human as final decision-maker; narrow, enacted (Act 848).
R. Scott Richardson R
Rep. · HB 1876
Gives users property rights over AI output; pro-innovation (Act 927).
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Clint Penzo R
Sen. · SB 258
Impact assessments on high-risk AI; died on calendar.
Lee Johnson R
Rep. · HB 1816
Heavy deployment barrier; withdrawn by author.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 1958Public-entity AI policy; human final decisionMonitor

HB 1958 (Act 848) requires every public entity to adopt an AI/automated-decision policy and keep a human as final decision-maker even when AI recommends an outcome. It expands training and disciplinary rules to cover AI.

Government Use · Sponsor: Meeks (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1876Ownership of generative AI outputsSupport

HB 1876 (Act 927) sets a default ownership rule for generative-AI outputs and training, assigning ownership to the user — except when an employer directs an employee's business use, in which case the employer owns it.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Richardson (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 258Privacy law with high-risk AI subchapterOppose

SB 258 (died) would have created a broad consumer-privacy law plus a high-risk-AI subchapter for developers, deployers, and employers with 50+ staff — mandating risk management, impact assessments, opt-outs, and algorithmic-discrimination reporting.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Penzo (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1877Criminalize AI-generated child imageryMonitor

HB 1877 (Act 977) expands child-exploitation offenses to AI-generated images indistinguishable from real children, with carve-outs for law enforcement and good-faith adversarial testing.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Meeks (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1816Restrict clinical AI absent FDA approvalOppose

HB 1816 (withdrawn) would have barred healthcare AI unless FDA-approved and lab-verified, making clinical and insurance AI contingent on dual external validation.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Johnson (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Delaware DE

Friendly · Flagship: HJR 7
68
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Largely enabling — an AI Commission, an enacted agentic-AI regulatory sandbox, and a schools AI/XR pilot — with only narrow targeted rules and no broad private-sector mandate.
Score breakdown Net index 68/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 1 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Delaware businesses using AI must disclose chatbots, avoid surveillance-based pricing, and meet stricter data-privacy duties, while an AI sandbox offers a supervised path to test agentic AI.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. Krista Griffith (D)
House Technology & Telecommunications • HB 380
“The burgeoning of artificial intelligence has thankfully brought a lot of consumer groups to the table, including the ACLU and other advocates looking to protect privacy.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Krista Griffith D
Rep. · HJR 7
Creates controlled sandbox to test agentic AI. Signed.
Jeff Hilovsky R
Rep. · HB 404
Procures and pilots AI/XR edtech; adoption-oriented.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Nnamdi Chukwuocha D
Rep. · HB 453
Restricts individualized pricing with treble damages.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HJR 7Agentic-AI regulatory sandboxSupport

HJR 7 directs Delaware's AI Commission to design a regulatory sandbox for testing agentic-AI technologies, with findings to the General Assembly and Governor. Signed in July 2025.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Griffith (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 404AI and extended reality in schools pilotSupport

HB 404 establishes an AI and Extended Reality in Schools Pilot Program run by the education department, with privacy/security standards and three-year performance reporting to guide possible expansion.

Education · Sponsor: Hilovsky (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 453Ban surveillance-based algorithmic pricingOppose

HB 453 bans surveillance-based price discrimination — using automated systems and personal, biometric, or behavioral data to set individualized prices — and bans electronic shelving labels in large grocers, effective 2027.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Chukwuocha (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 306Disclosure when chatting with a chatbotMonitor

HB 306 requires businesses to disclose when a consumer is interacting with a chatbot, AI agent, or avatar rather than a human, with statutory damages and civil penalties.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Romer (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 380Privacy act AI data assessmentsMonitor

HB 380 updates the Personal Data Privacy Act, lowering applicability thresholds, tightening data-sale rules, strengthening consumer rights, and mandating data-protection assessments.

Data/Privacy · Sponsor: Griffith (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Georgia GA

Friendly · Flagship: SB 37
68
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Favors study commissions and government-use governance, enacting only narrow targeted rules (healthcare AI oversight, chatbot safety) while broad private-sector mandates stalled.
Score breakdown Net index 68/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 1 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Georgia businesses using AI in insurance, housing, or consumer chatbots must add human oversight and disclosures, while state vendors face new AI governance and procurement requirements.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Kay Kirkpatrick (R)
Senate Technology & Infrastructure Innovation • Mar 5, 2026
“We want the use of AI to be allowed in Georgia… but it cannot be the sole determinant of a denial.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
John Albers R
Sen. · SB 37
Government AI usage plans and advisory board; no private mandates.
Nikki Merritt D
Sen. · SB 455
Advisory commission to inventory state AI and set guidelines.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Bryce Berry D
Rep. · HB 715
Restricts automated decision tools in housing; stalled.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 37AI Accountability Act for government AISupport

SB 37 (AI Accountability Act) requires every Georgia governmental entity to adopt AI usage plans by Dec. 2026 covering fairness, privacy, governance, human oversight, and incident response, and creates a 12-member Georgia Board for AI.

Government Use · Sponsor: Albers (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 455Georgia AI CommissionSupport

SB 455 establishes the Georgia AI Commission to advise the legislature and executive, develop statewide guidelines, inventory agency AI systems, and flag high-risk applications.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Merritt (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 444AI cannot solely deny insurance coverageMonitor

SB 444 bars insurers and review agents from using AI as the sole basis for denying coverage; AI may assist but a clinical peer's judgment must override it. Enacted as Act 411.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Kirkpatrick (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 540Conversational AI disclosure & minor safetyMonitor

SB 540 sets safety and transparency rules for public-facing conversational AI, requiring disclosures (especially for minors), restricting harmful content, and setting suicide-response protocols. Enacted as Act 518.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Anavitarte (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 715Fair & Future Ready Housing Act (AI bias)Oppose

HB 715 (Fair and Future Ready Housing Act) regulates AI and automated tools in housing decisions to prevent discrimination, barring use without human oversight and requiring disclosure, with AG enforcement.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Berry (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Indiana IN

Friendly · Flagship: HB 1296
68
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Light footprint dominated by narrow disclosure and education-inventory bills plus pro-growth advanced-computing tax incentives; no broad private-sector mandate advanced.
Score breakdown Net index 68/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Few binding private-sector mandates
1 enabling/Support bills · 0 restrictive/Oppose bills · 4 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Indiana rewards AI/quantum and data-center investment with tax breaks while imposing AI disclosure duties on health insurers and providers, raising compliance costs but signaling a tech-friendly market.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. Chris Judy (R)
House Ways & Means • HB 1601
“I find this absolutely fascinating. I think this is our new arms race, honestly, when it comes to quantum computing and AI.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Sue Errington D
Rep. · HB 1296
DOE inventories AI platforms; protects against AI-detector misuse.
Edmond Soliday R
Rep. · HB 1601
Incentives for advanced computing and data centers. Enacted.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
No clearly identified AI skeptics on the record.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 1296AI inventory and policies for schoolsMonitor

HB 1296 directs the education department to build an inventory of approved AI platforms and a model AI policy, requires schools to adopt AI-use policies, and bars penalizing students based solely on AI-detector evidence.

Education · Sponsor: Errington (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1601Quantum & advanced computing tax incentivesSupport

HB 1601 expands data-center sales-tax incentives to cover quantum and advanced computing and defense infrastructure, with award certificates and property-tax exemptions. Enacted as Public Law 178.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Soliday (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1620Disclosure of AI use in health careMonitor

HB 1620 requires health-care providers and insurers to tell patients when AI is used to make or inform care or coverage decisions, defining key terms, effective July 2025.

Healthcare · Sponsor: King (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1271Limit AI downcoding of health claimsMonitor

HB 1271 (2026) overhauls health-claim payment rules, barring insurers from AI-driven 'downcoding' and retroactive cuts, and limiting audits to boost billing transparency. Became Public Law 88.

Healthcare · Sponsor: McGuire (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1377Autonomous truck human-operator ruleMonitor

HB 1377 sets rules for autonomous tractor-trailers on Indiana highways, requiring federal safety compliance and a qualified human operator physically present to take control when needed.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Boy (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Oregon OR

Friendly · Flagship: HB 4103
68
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Dominated by study commissions, CIO studies, and government-use restrictions with no broad private-sector mandate advancing; only a narrow health-insurer AI rule is sector-specific.
Score breakdown Net index 68/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 1 restrictive/Oppose bills · 3 monitor
What this means for AI companies: AI vendors and health insurers face new Oregon transparency, notice, and appeal duties; foreign-linked AI is banned from state IT; privacy thresholds tightened, raising compliance costs.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Dr. Christian Smith, Oregon ACEP
Joint Cmte on Information Management & Technology • Feb 6, 2026 • HB 4054
“We're hearing from our Oregon members that it's extremely difficult to even know when artificial intelligence tools are used to downcode a claim or underpay for emergency medicine visits.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Sue Rieke Smith D
Rep. · HB 4103
AI commission and Chief AI Officer; study-and-advise posture.
Grayber D
Rep. · HB 3771
Pure study bill; no regulatory burden.
Darcey Edwards R
Rep. · HB 3936
Security procurement restriction; enacted, no private burden.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Willy Chotzen D
Rep. · HB 3899
Expands profiling controls; stalled in committee.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 4103Aaron Woods Commission on AIMonitor

HB 4103 establishes the Senator Aaron Woods Commission on AI within Enterprise Information Services to monitor AI use and advise on policy, directing DAS to hire a Chief AI Officer and review AI impacts on equity, privacy, and workforce.

Government Use · Sponsor: Smith (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 3771State CIO to study artificial intelligenceSupport

HB 3771 requires the State CIO to study AI and submit a report with legislative recommendations by September 2026; the study provision sunsets January 2027.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Grayber (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 3936Ban foreign covered-vendor AI on state ITMonitor

HB 3936 prohibits hardware, software, or services using AI from a designated 'covered vendor' national-security threat on state IT assets. Signed as Chapter 396 (2025), effective January 2026.

Government Use · Sponsor: Edwards (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 4054Notice when AI downcodes health claimsMonitor

HB 4054 requires health insurers using AI to downcode claims to notify providers in writing within two business days with reasons and an appeal, and mandates evidence-based utilization-review criteria and peer review.

Healthcare · Sponsor: — · Open bill on USLege →
HB 3899Lower thresholds for data-privacy regulationOppose

HB 3899 lowers thresholds for controllers under Oregon's privacy law and bars processing/selling sensitive data for targeted advertising or profiling, requiring notices, minimization, consent, and opt-outs.

Data/Privacy · Sponsor: Chotzen (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

West Virginia WV

Friendly · Flagship: HB 3187
68
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Leans enabling — an enacted AI Task Force and education/sandbox bills — with only narrow deepfake, mental-health, and disclosure measures and no broad private-sector regime.
Score breakdown Net index 68/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Few binding private-sector mandates
4 enabling/Support bills · 0 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: WV's AI agenda favors business: a task force mandated to find AI economic opportunities, optional AI workforce courses for students, and narrow guardrails in mental health and child safety — innovation-friendly, low-burden.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Del. Jarred Cannon (R)
House Floor • Mar 21, 2025 • HB 3187 (passed 97-0)
“Last year, the legislature created a state task force on artificial intelligence as a one year pilot program. House Bill 3187 would extend the sunset of that task force to 2027.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Jarred Cannon R
Del. · HB 3187
Task force studying AI oversight and economic opportunity. Enacted.
Stephens R
Rep. · HB 5205
AI standards and optional AI sandbox courses.
Amy Grady R
Sen. · SB 198
Criminalizes AI-generated CSAM. Enacted.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
No clearly identified AI skeptics on the record.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 3187WV Task Force on Artificial IntelligenceSupport

HB 3187 establishes and extends the West Virginia Task Force on AI within the Governor's Office to 2027, charging it with defining AI for legislation, recommending responsible oversight, and identifying AI economic opportunities, with annual reports.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Cannon (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 5205WV Balance Act; AI in classroomsSupport

HB 5205 (WV Balance Act) directs the State Board of Education to create model policies and AI standards for instructional technology in classrooms, requiring balanced AI-use policies with transparency safeguards and optional AI sandbox courses tied to workforce development.

Education · Sponsor: Stephens (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HCR 94Study AI elective course in high schoolsSupport

HCR 94 requests a study of creating an AI Education Program and elective course in public high schools, assessing existing programs, funding, and training gaps to recommend foundational AI coursework.

Education · Sponsor: Cannon (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 198Prohibit AI-generated child pornographySupport

SB 198 amends the criminal code to prohibit creating, distributing, or possessing computer-generated and AI-fabricated child pornography, with definitions, penalties, and mandatory reporting. Enacted.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Grady (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 4770Limits on AI in mental health careMonitor

HB 4770 establishes limits on using AI to deliver mental-health care, with administrative-support exceptions, creating a task force, mandating transparency and consent, and barring AI from independent therapeutic decisions, effective January 2027.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Worrell (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

South Dakota SD

Friendly · Flagship: SB 164
66
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Substantive AI bills mostly failed, were withdrawn, or tabled, and the lead enacted measure is a narrow election-deepfake law — an enabling, low-mandate posture.
Score breakdown Net index 66/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 1 restrictive/Oppose bills · 3 monitor
What this means for AI companies: SD favors light-touch AI policy: a study task force died on the House floor and key regulatory bills (therapy, health-carrier AI) were withdrawn; only deepfake-election limits became law.
No video clip available
South Dakota legislative video is copyright-restricted; the platform blocks clip creation. Source hearing: HB 1125, video 74361, Rep. Jorgensen (~706-787s).
View source hearing on USLege →
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Taffy Howard R
Rep. · HB 1125
Would study AI development and state impact; failed.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Liz Larson D
Sen. · SB 169
Human review of AI coverage denials; withdrawn.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 164Prohibit deepfakes to influence electionsMonitor

SB 164 prohibits using AI deepfakes with intent to injure a candidate within 90 days of an election unless clearly disclosed, a Class 1 misdemeanor with civil liability, exempting satire and bona fide newscasts. Signed in 2025.

Deepfakes/Elections · Sponsor: Larson (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1125Taskforce to study AI impactSupport

HB 1125 would create a task force to study AI's development and impact across agriculture, healthcare, and education, reporting by December 2028. Passed committee but failed on the House floor 26-43.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Howard (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 168Regulate use of chatbots by minorsMonitor

SB 168 regulates chatbots used by minors, including companions and therapy bots, requiring age verification, emergency safety measures, data limits, and professional oversight. Passed Senate Judiciary 6-0 then killed.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Larson (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 169AI use by health carriers in determinationsOppose

SB 169 would require health carriers using AI in utilization review to consider individual patient data, bar sole reliance on group data, and reserve adverse determinations for licensed professionals. Withdrawn.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Larson (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1144Restrict AI in therapy servicesMonitor

HB 1144 would restrict AI in therapy, barring it from independently conducting therapeutic communication or clinical decisions without licensed approval, while allowing administrative use. Withdrawn.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Rehfeldt (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Alaska AK

Friendly · Flagship: SB 2
64
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: AI study task force and narrow deepfake/election rules lead; the one broad mandate (SB 2) is stalled, keeping the posture study-first and largely enabling.
Score breakdown Net index 64/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 1 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: AI firms face new Alaska duties — generative-AI disclosure, agency impact assessments, synthetic-media election rules, AI-CSAM criminal liability — while AV rules and an AI task force signal cautious openness.
No video clip available
Alaska legislative video is copyright-restricted statewide, so clips cannot be generated. Source hearing: House Judiciary (Jan 26, 2026), Rep. Sarah Vance presenting HB 47.
View source hearing on USLege →
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
George Rauscher R
Rep. · HCR 3
Study task force on AI economic opportunity before any mandates.
Robert Myers R
Sen. · SB 148
Enables AV deployment with safety-operator and liability framework.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Shelley Hughes R
Sen. · SB 2
Broad regime: impact assessments, consent, banned biometric uses; stalled in committee.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 2AI, deepfakes, cybersecurity, data transfersOppose

SB 2 requires disclosure of AI-manipulated election deepfakes and regulates agencies' use of generative AI in consequential decisions, mandating biennial AI inventories, impact assessments, consent and appeals, and banning uses like biometric identification. It creates civil liability and restricts interagency data transfers without notice.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Hughes (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HCR 3Establish AI legislative task forceSupport

HCR 3 creates a Joint Legislative Task Force on AI to study AI development, ethics, economic opportunities, and regulation. It must build common terminology, assess government and economic uses, address workforce needs, and deliver a strategic plan by January 2026.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Rauscher (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 148Regulate autonomous vehiclesSupport

SB 148 sets autonomous-vehicle rules requiring federal-standard compliance and barring interstate commercial AV transport without a human safety operator. It defines automation levels and assigns crash liability mainly to the human operator to enable controlled self-driving deployment.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Myers (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 33Synthetic media liability and electionsMonitor

SB 33 establishes synthetic-media standards, classifying synthetic-media defamation as defamation per se and barring its knowing use to influence elections absent disclosure (with satire exceptions). It sets remedies and shields providers that merely host third-party content.

Deepfakes/Elections · Sponsor: Cronk (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 47Criminalize AI-generated CSAMMonitor

HB 47 strengthens child sexual abuse material laws by creating offenses for AI-generated obscene CSAM and expanding definitions and penalties. It also tightens teaching-certificate and school-bus licensing and updates criminal procedure to enhance prosecution.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Vance (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Oklahoma OK

Friendly · Flagship: HB 3545
63
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: The comprehensive AI regime died in 2025; what is advancing or enacted is narrow and targeted (government-use limits, school guidelines, minor-protection chatbots), leaving the private sector largely unburdened.
Score breakdown Net index 63/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 1 restrictive/Oppose bills · 3 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Vendors selling AI to Oklahoma agencies or schools face new disclosure, age-verification, procurement-compliance and educator-supervision rules; chatbot and edtech firms bear the heaviest compliance and liability exposure.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Pro Tem Anthony Moore (R)
House Common Education • Apr 8, 2026 • SB 1734
“Senate Bill 1734 creates the Oklahoma Responsible Tech in Schools Act and prohibits AI tools from being used in public districts for instruction except through educator-directed uses.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Maynard R
Rep. · HB 3545
Limits government AI use with OMES reporting; gov-only scope.
Ally Seifried R
Sen. · SB 1734
School AI guidelines and student-data protection. Enacted.
Anthony Moore R
Rep. · HB 1782
Promotes AI adoption in schools and workforce.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Arturo Alonso-Sandoval D
Rep. · HB 1916
Risk-tiered AI regime; stalled in Rules.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 3545Govern AI use by state agenciesMonitor

HB 3545 establishes a framework governing AI use by Oklahoma state agencies, defining terms, prohibiting harmful applications, and regulating permissible uses, with compliance reviews and annual OMES reporting.

Government Use · Sponsor: Maynard (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 1734Responsible Technology in Schools ActMonitor

SB 1734 (Responsible Technology in Schools Act) restricts AI tools in public schools to educator-directed, supervised uses while protecting student data and local control. Approved by the Governor May 2026.

Education · Sponsor: Seifried (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 1521Regulate AI chatbots; protect minorsMonitor

SB 1521 regulates AI chatbots, prohibiting those soliciting minors into harmful behavior, mandating age verification and AI disclosure, barring minors from companion AI, with AG enforcement.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Hamilton (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1782AI Education Innovation ActSupport

HB 1782 (AI Education Innovation Act) addresses AI in K-12 and higher education, edtech, curriculum, and workforce; as introduced it largely established the act's name and effective date.

Education · Sponsor: Moore (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1916Responsible Deployment of AI Systems ActOppose

HB 1916 (Responsible Deployment of AI Systems Act) would establish a risk-based framework requiring assessments, documentation, human oversight, and public notice, creating an AI Council and sandboxes. Stalled in Rules.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Alonso-Sandoval (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Kentucky KY

Friendly · Flagship: SB 175
62
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Republican-led docket favors government AI-health platforms, a robotics-education fund, and a 2025 AI consortium task force; only narrow therapy/chatbot disclosure rules.
Score breakdown Net index 62/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Few binding private-sector mandates
3 enabling/Support bills · 0 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: AI vendors face new Kentucky chatbot, mental-health, and data-portability duties with AG enforcement, while health-tech firms gain a state-sanctioned rural AI platform revenue channel.
No video clip available
Kentucky legislative video is copyright/law-restricted; the platform blocks clip creation. Source hearing: Senate Health Services (Feb 25, 2026), Sen. Meredith on SB 175.
View source hearing on USLege →
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Stephen Meredith R
Sen. · SB 175
AI-assisted virtual health platform for rural providers.
Amanda Mays Bledsoe R
Sen. · SCR 142
Consortium to foster AI innovation aligned to state needs.
Lewis R
Rep. · HB 44
Funds robotics teams and advanced-manufacturing STEM.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
No clearly identified AI skeptics on the record.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 175Kentucky Health Command AI platformSupport

SB 175 creates the Kentucky Health Command to run an AI-assisted, avatar-based virtual health platform for rural providers, offering nonclinical education, navigation, and telehealth while barring AI from diagnosis or treatment.

Government Use · Sponsor: Meredith (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SCR 142Commonwealth AI Consortium Task ForceSupport

SCR 142 directs creation of the Commonwealth AI Consortium Task Force to coordinate AI development across Kentucky, drawing members from government, education, healthcare, and industry to foster innovation.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Bledsoe (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 44Robotics education funding for STEMSupport

HB 44 (Advanced Manufacturing Through Robotics Education Act) sets up a fund and selection committee to support student robotics teams and competitions, expanding STEM and advanced-manufacturing opportunities.

Education · Sponsor: Lewis (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 641AI in Mental Health Act (chatbots)Monitor

HB 641 (AI in Mental Health Act) regulates mental-health chatbots, setting limits on data handling, advertising, and disclosures and requiring safety, transparency, and privacy policies with AG enforcement.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Grossl (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 559Digital Choice Act data portabilityMonitor

HB 559 (Digital Choice Act) imposes data-privacy, portability, and interoperability duties on social-media companies and AI model operators, giving users rights to access, transfer, and delete their data.

Data/Privacy · Sponsor: Grossl (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

New Hampshire NH

Friendly · Flagship: SB 657
62
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Comprehensive RAISE-style and sector bills were mostly killed (Inexpedient to Legislate); surviving measures lean toward sandboxes and government-adoption waivers.
Score breakdown Net index 62/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 2 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: New Hampshire enacted one targeted AI child-protection crime (HB 143) but killed or stalled broader AI-governance, licensing, and oversight bills — leaving business with narrow criminal exposure but no comprehensive regime.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Sharon Carson (R)
Senate Judiciary • SB 657
“I don't think this bill is quite ready to come forward… I'm wondering if I can offer a committee amendment that would replace it with the commission to study the broader effects of artificial intelligence.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Rebecca Perkins Kwoka D
Sen. · SB 657
AI oversight analyst, study commission, deceptive-AI cause of action.
Cormen D
Rep. · HB 1506
Waiver process loosening limits on state AI use.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Patrick Long D
Rep. · HB 1725
AI council and non-discrimination standards; killed.
Pearl R
Sen. · SB 640
Barred unlicensed AI provision of licensed services; failed.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 657State agency use of IT and AI systemsMonitor

SB 657 establishes an AI oversight framework — a DOJ AI-analyst position, a study commission, and a civil cause of action against deceptive AI uses. Passed both chambers but the Senate nonconcurred with the House amendment.

Government Use · Sponsor: Perkins Kwoka (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1725Responsible AI Governance ActOppose

HB 1725 (Responsible AI Governance) would create a state AI council, transparency and non-discrimination standards, a regulatory sandbox, and AG enforcement. Found Inexpedient to Legislate (killed).

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Long (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1506Exception to state agency AI restrictionsSupport

HB 1506 creates a waiver process letting state-agency heads request relief from existing restrictions on AI use, with Executive Council approval. Referred for interim study.

Government Use · Sponsor: Cormen (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 143Liability for AI communication to childrenMonitor

HB 143 criminalizes and creates a private right of action against AI operators who knowingly direct generative communications to children encouraging sexual conduct, drug use, self-harm, or violence. Signed; Chapter 270, effective Jan 2026.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Harvey-Bolia (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 640AI use in licensed professional servicesOppose

SB 640 would prohibit using AI to provide services requiring a professional license, with informed-consent and supervision rules for psychology and mental-health counseling. Found Inexpedient to Legislate.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Pearl (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

New Mexico NM

Friendly · Flagship: HB 60
62
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Multiple comprehensive AI Act attempts (algorithmic discrimination, synthetic content) all postponed indefinitely without advancing, leaving only narrow gov-use, deepfake, and study measures in play.
Score breakdown Net index 62/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 2 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: New Mexico's AI bills impose transparency, disclosure, impact-assessment, and appeal duties on companies deploying high-risk or generative AI and companion chatbots, raising compliance costs but clarifying rules.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
AG Raúl Torrez (D)
Senate Finance • Feb 3, 2026 • SB 68
“We are investigating an ongoing and increasing concern about the impact of artificial intelligence and AI chatbots on teen mental health… this unregulated space.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Heather Berghmans D
Sen. · SB 68
Public-sector AI policy and human-in-the-loop; postponed.
Gallegos D
Rep. · HJM 9
Study memorial for AI/privacy recommendations.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Christine Chandler D
Rep. · HB 60
AI-Act-style framework; died in committee but signals intent.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 60Artificial Intelligence Act (high-risk)Oppose

HB 60 (Artificial Intelligence Act) creates a framework for high-risk AI, requiring developers to document and disclose systems and deployers to conduct impact assessments and adopt risk-management policies against algorithmic discrimination, with consumer notice and appeal rights and DOJ enforcement.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Chandler (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 28AI Transparency ActOppose

HB 28 (AI Transparency Act) requires entities using AI for consequential consumer decisions to give advance notice and explain adverse decisions, with correction and appeal, and requires companion AI to disclose its AI nature.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Chandler (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 68AI Government Use ActMonitor

SB 68 (AI Government Use Act) requires public bodies to adopt AI policies and training, mandates employees make final consequential decisions, and requires security safeguards for nonpublic data.

Government Use · Sponsor: Berghmans (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 141AI Accountability Act (synthetic content)Monitor

HB 141 (AI Accountability Act) mandates disclosure and labeling of synthetic content from generative AI, including provenance disclosures and platform obligations, with civil and criminal liability, enforced by the AG.

Deepfakes/Elections · Sponsor: Serrato (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HJM 9AI and data privacy interim studySupport

HJM 9 asks the Legislative Council to establish a 2025 interim committee to examine AI and data privacy, gather stakeholder input, and develop recommendations for the 2026 session.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Gallegos (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Texas TX

Friendly · Flagship: HB 149 (TRAIGA)
62
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: TRAIGA passed as a comprehensive framework but is government-focused with a regulatory sandbox, AI Council, and innovation incentives rather than broad private-sector algorithmic-discrimination mandates.
Score breakdown Net index 62/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Framework present, narrower scope Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 1 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Businesses deploying AI in Texas face new disclosure, anti-discrimination, and consumer-protection duties under HB 149 (effective 1/1/26), with AG enforcement, civil penalties, and a sandbox for compliant innovation.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. Giovanni Capriglione (R)
House Delivery of Government Efficiency • Apr 2, 2025 (reported 13-0)
“The chair lays out his pending business House Bill 149. Members, this is my bill — the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Tan Parker R
Sen. · SB 1700
Creates state AI division to modernize legacy systems.
Harrison R
Rep. · HB 3808
Study-and-test lab with regulatory mitigation agreements.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Salman Bhojani D
Rep. · HB 5496
Best-practice, bias-prevention duties as deceptive trade practice.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 149Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA)Monitor

HB 149 (Texas Responsible AI Governance Act / TRAIGA) creates a comprehensive framework regulating AI development and use, with consumer disclosure requirements, bans on manipulative and discriminatory uses, and AG enforcement with civil penalties. It establishes a Texas AI Council and a regulatory sandbox; effective 1/1/26.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Capriglione (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 1700AI Division within Dept. of Information ResourcesSupport

SB 1700 creates an AI Division within the Department of Information Resources to oversee generative AI across state projects, aiming to modernize legacy systems and improve efficiency.

Government Use · Sponsor: Parker (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 3808AI advisory council and learning laboratorySupport

HB 3808 establishes an AI Advisory Council and an AI Learning Laboratory to study and report on agency AI use, enabling testing under regulatory mitigation agreements to inform future legislation.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Harrison (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 668Disclosure of information on AIMonitor

SB 668 mandates AI transparency, requiring entities above set revenue thresholds to disclose details about their AI models — functions, third-party inputs, and modifications — with anti-retaliation protections and AG oversight.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Hughes (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 5496Disclosure and use of AIOppose

HB 5496 requires businesses to adopt AI transparency and accountability measures — best practices, detection tools, explanations for AI decisions, and bias prevention — with violations treated as deceptive trade practices.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Bhojani (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Florida FL

Balanced · Flagship: HB 1395
58
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Pursued comprehensive AI Bill of Rights frameworks and sector mandates, but most died in committee or were vetoed — leaving mostly study bills.
Score breakdown Net index 58/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 3 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Florida businesses deploying AI face new consent, transparency, chatbot, data and likeness rules plus foreign-vendor contracting limits, though most 2025-26 AI bills died in committee, leaving requirements unsettled.
No video clip available
Florida legislative video is copyright/state-law restricted; the platform blocks clip creation for FL Senate and House sources.
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Gayle Harrell R
Sen. · SB 146
Neutral fact-finding on agency AI; died.
Miller R
Rep. · HB 491
Narrow civil-liberties restriction; died.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Alex Rizo R
Rep. · HB 1395
Consumer rights, chatbot rules, AG penalties; died in subcommittee.
Jason Brodeur R
Sen. · SB 2
Resident AI rights, chatbot/edtech limits; died.
Jennifer Bradley R
Sen. · SB 794
Bans AI as sole basis for denials; died.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 1395Comprehensive AI framework / Bill of RightsOppose

HB 1395 creates a comprehensive Florida AI framework: an 'AI Bill of Rights,' consumer protections, companion-chatbot rules for minors, bot-disclosure transparency, likeness protections, and bans on government AI contracts with foreign entities of concern, with DLA enforcement.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Rizo (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 2Artificial Intelligence Bill of RightsOppose

SB 2 establishes the 'AI Bill of Rights,' restricting government AI contracts with certain foreign entities, setting parental-consent safeguards for minors using companion chatbots, regulating AI in schools, and protecting image and likeness.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Brodeur (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 794Human review for insurance denialsOppose

SB 794 requires every insurance claim denial to be reviewed and signed off by a qualified human, barring AI as the sole basis. Insurers must document review, disclose specifics, and submit to audits.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Bradley (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 146State agency AI use studySupport

SB 146 directs the Florida Digital Service to study how state agencies use AI and its impacts, with a report due to the Governor and Legislature by March 2027.

Government Use · Sponsor: Harrell (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 491Ban AI firearm detection by agenciesMonitor

HB 491 prohibits government agencies from using AI to detect concealed firearms in public areas, with school exceptions; violations are a first-degree misdemeanor.

Government Use · Sponsor: Miller (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Mississippi MS

Balanced · Flagship: HB 1723
58
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Nearly all 2026 AI bills died in committee except a passed AI definition; surviving signals favor education pilots and task forces over binding private-sector mandates.
Score breakdown Net index 58/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
3 enabling/Support bills · 1 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Businesses gain legal clarity from an enacted AI definition (HB 1723); failed bills signal looming Mississippi rules on AI fraud liability, healthcare denials, and mental-health and education use.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Bart Williams (R), Tech Cmte Chair
Senate Technology • SB 2437 (companion to HB 1723)
“The only purpose of this bill is to establish a definition for artificial intelligence… We felt it would be good to establish a baseline.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Jill Ford R
Rep. · HB 1723
Statutory definition with no mandates. Enacted.
Chris Johnson R
Sen. · SB 2429
Study task force on responsible K-12 AI; died.
Faulkner D
Rep. · HB 1605
Voluntary AI-assisted STEM pilot; died.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Brent Powell R
Rep. · HB 1717
Human review of AI clinical decisions; failed.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 1723Define artificial intelligence in state lawSupport

HB 1723 creates a single statutory definition of 'artificial intelligence' in Mississippi law, conforming to federal language as a baseline for future regulation. Signed by the Governor March 2026.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Ford (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 2429AI in Education Task ForceSupport

SB 2429 (AI in Education Task Force Act) would create a task force to develop policy for responsible AI in K-12 — ethics, data privacy, curriculum, training, procurement. Died in committee.

Education · Sponsor: Johnson (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1605AI and STEM Education Innovation ActSupport

HB 1605 (AI and STEM Education Innovation Act) would authorize a pilot for voluntary AI-assisted learning in grades 6-12, prioritizing rural and disadvantaged schools, with a 2030 sunset. Died in committee.

Education · Sponsor: Faulkner (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 2354AI Fraud and Accountability ActMonitor

SB 2354 (AI Fraud and Accountability Act) would create civil causes of action against developers and users who knowingly deploy AI for fraud, with damages, punitive damages, and joint liability. Died in committee.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Blackmon (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1717Medical Judgment Protection ActOppose

HB 1717 (Medical Judgment Protection Act) would regulate clinical and payer AI so it assists but never replaces human judgment — mandating disclosure, clinician attestation, and banning fully automated denials. Died in committee.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Powell (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

South Carolina SC

Balanced · Flagship: S 963
58
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Pairs explicitly pro-innovation signals (AI Week, open-source resolution, AI education electives) with narrowly targeted rules, but a Colorado-style high-risk bill and an advancing chatbot act pull it toward the middle.
Score breakdown Net index 58/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
3 enabling/Support bills · 2 restrictive/Oppose bills · 0 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Businesses face one of the strictest US AI/chatbot regimes: opt-in consent, ad/data-sale bans, product liability, and a private right of action; high-risk AI deployers also face anti-discrimination compliance duties.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Matt Leber (R)
Senate LCI Special Subcommittee • Apr 15, 2026 • S 896
“We've come to a point with this emerging technology that we have got to start flexing our AI legislative muscles and get involved here, make sure we have perfect consumer protection.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Matt Leber R
Sen. · SR 225
Pro-innovation; opposes AI censorship, favors open-source.
Timothy McGinnis R
Rep. · HR 5085
Adopted resolution promoting AI literacy and adoption.
William Clyburn D
Rep. · H 4582
Permissive measure letting districts teach AI skills.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Matt Leber R
Sen. · S 963
Colorado-style high-risk regime; most restrictive if advanced.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
S 963Consumer protections for high-risk AIOppose

S 963 (Consumer Protections in Interactions with AI Systems Act) imposes requirements on developers and deployers of high-risk AI to prevent algorithmic discrimination in consequential decisions, mandating documentation, impact assessments, and consumer disclosures with AG enforcement.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Leber (R) · Open bill on USLege →
S 896Chatbot Protection ActOppose

S 896 (Chatbot Protection Act) requires affirmative consent for personal-data processing, transparency that users interact with a chatbot, and data-security measures, treating chatbots as products for civil liability with a private right of action.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Leber (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SR 225Resolution supporting open-source AISupport

SR 225 (Senate Resolution) expresses support for developing AI in South Carolina while opposing censorship or bias, promoting open-source decentralized AI, accountability for misuse, and an innovation-friendly environment.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Leber (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HR 5085Declare AI Week for awarenessSupport

HR 5085 (House Resolution) declares March 30–April 2, 2026 'AI Week' to raise public awareness, promote AI literacy for the workforce, and highlight technical-college events.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: McGinnis (R) · Open bill on USLege →
H 4582Optional AI instruction electivesSupport

H 4582 permits each school district, beginning 2026-2027, to offer age-appropriate instruction on accessing, using, and critically evaluating AI tools, with state implementation guidelines.

Education · Sponsor: Clyburn (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Wisconsin WI

Balanced · Flagship: AB 965
58
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Mostly narrow — AI legal-personhood denial, court translation use, child-chatbot limits — plus stalled algorithmic-pricing and insurer-AI bills; no enacted broad mandate keeps it mid-range.
Score breakdown Net index 58/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Framework present, narrower scope Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 2 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Wisconsin AI bills impose human-review mandates on insurers and chatbot operators, raising compliance costs, while clarifying AI liability rests with developers and enabling AI court-translation adoption.
No video clip available
No recorded Wisconsin hearing videos with transcripts were available on the platform for any of these AI bills across multiple searches.
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Dave Maxey R
Rep. · AB 292
Allows AI machine-assisted translation in court.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Kelda Roys D
Sen. · SB 1066
Bars AI prior-auth denials without provider review.
Angelito Tenorio D
Rep. · AB 1109
Companion barring AI medical-necessity denials.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
AB 965AI chatbots simulating relationships with childrenMonitor

AB 965 regulates AI companion chatbots that simulate humanlike relationships with children under 18, requiring operators to prevent harmful content or unlicensed mental-health services, with civil forfeitures and a private right of action, effective 2027.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Franklin (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 932Legal status of artificial intelligenceMonitor

SB 932 establishes that AI systems are not legal persons and cannot own property, serve as officers, marry, or be liable, assigning all ownership and liability for AI outputs to human developers, manufacturers, and owners.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Jacque (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 1066AI denying prior authorizationOppose

SB 1066 prohibits using AI to deny prior authorizations based on medical necessity or experimental status under health plans; denials may occur only after a licensed provider personally reviews the request.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Roys (D) · Open bill on USLege →
AB 292AI translation in court proceedingsSupport

AB 292 allows courts to use AI or machine-assisted translation in civil, criminal, municipal, and administrative proceedings, replacing or supplementing human interpreters, and extends remote-interpreter authorization to criminal trials.

Government Use · Sponsor: Maxey (R) · Open bill on USLege →
AB 1109AI denying prior authorizationOppose

AB 1109 bars health insurance policies and self-insured plans from using AI to deny prior authorizations based on medical necessity, requiring a licensed provider to review and approve any denial first.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Tenorio (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

New Jersey NJ

Balanced · Flagship: S 3432
56
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Strong pro-innovation incentives (enacted Next NJ AI tax-credit, apprenticeships, advisory council) coexist with newly introduced restrictive worker-displacement and AI safety-testing bills.
Score breakdown Net index 56/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 3 restrictive/Oppose bills · 0 monitor
What this means for AI companies: New Jersey is pro-AI-investment (enacted S 3432 tax credits for AI data centers) while layering safety-testing, workforce-transition, and ratepayer-protection bills — generous incentives plus rising compliance and energy-cost scrutiny.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Alex Ambrose, NJ Policy Perspective
Assembly Telecommunications & Utilities • AI data centers
“We are not here to debate the ethics of AI. We are here to talk about the facts that AI data centers are causing our bills to go up. They are the number one reason our bills have gone up.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Raj Mukherji D
Sen. · S 3432
Incentives drawing AI and data-center capital. Enacted.
Angela McKnight D
Sen. · S 3871
Tax credits for AI apprenticeships; pro-adoption.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Troy Singleton D
Sen. · S 1802
Annual safety testing and reporting for all AI companies.
Andrew Zwicker D
Sen. · S 4458
Employer notice plus displacement fund and wage insurance.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
S 3432Next New Jersey AI investment tax creditSupport

S 3432 (Next New Jersey Program Act) creates EDA tax credits up to $250M/project for major AI and AI-data-center capital investment and job creation. Enacted as P.L.2024 c.49 — the marquee pro-AI-investment law.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Mukherji (D) · Open bill on USLege →
S 1802AI safety tests and reportingOppose

S 1802 requires AI companies operating in NJ to conduct annual safety tests and report results to the Office of Information Technology, which sets minimum standards and reviews for bias, inaccuracy, and cybersecurity risk.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Singleton (D) · Open bill on USLege →
S 4458AI Workforce Transition ActOppose

S 4458 (AI Workforce Transition Act) establishes a five-year program: employer notice of AI-driven job cuts, an AI Displacement Account funding retraining and wage insurance, and employer tax credits.

Employment · Sponsor: Zwicker (D) · Open bill on USLege →
S 4075Regulate AI monitoring in employmentOppose

S 4075 regulates AI electronic monitoring in employment, requiring impact assessments, human oversight, and bargaining over workplace AI monitoring and automated decisions.

Employment · Sponsor: Zwicker (D) · Open bill on USLege →
S 3871AI Apprenticeship Program & tax creditSupport

S 3871 (2024 session) establishes an AI Apprenticeship Program in the labor department plus a tax credit up to $5,000/apprentice, incentivizing employers to train workers in AI fields.

Education · Sponsor: McKnight (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Missouri MO

Balanced · Flagship: SB 1012
55
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Liability-clarifying non-sentience bills and deepfake/CSAM measures advance, but no comprehensive private-sector mandate moves, keeping the posture moderate.
Score breakdown Net index 55/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Few binding private-sector mandates
1 enabling/Support bills · 0 restrictive/Oppose bills · 4 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Missouri AI bills raise compliance burdens on developers, deployers, and platforms — liability exposure, AI-content labeling, chatbot age-verification, deepfake penalties, and limits on marketing AI as therapy.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. Scott Miller (R)
House Emerging Issues • HB 1747
“We perceive so much information through the use of technology. Let us at least provide some accountability and remedy where the citizens of Missouri have suffered harm.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Scott Miller R
Rep. · HB 1746
Clarifies AI is non-sentient; assigns liability to humans. Do Pass.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
No clearly identified AI skeptics on the record.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 1746AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility ActSupport

HB 1746 (AI Non-Sentience and Responsibility Act) declares AI systems are not legal persons and assigns liability for AI-caused harm chiefly to owners and users — developers only for design defects or negligence. Reported Do Pass 9-0.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Miller (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 1012AI deepfakes in political ads / intimate imageryMonitor

SB 1012 regulates AI-generated content and deepfakes, requiring disclaimers on political ads using AI and criminalizing intimate deepfakes with felony penalties.

Deepfakes/Elections · Sponsor: Nicola (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1887Taylor Swift Act: intimate depictionsMonitor

HB 1887 (Taylor Swift Act) creates criminal offenses and civil penalties for non-consensual disclosure of digitally manipulated intimate depictions, with heightened protection for minors and provider immunity.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Hausman (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 1444AI in mental health representationMonitor

SB 1444 adds a provision prohibiting any person from advertising or representing AI as a licensed mental-health professional or therapy provider, enforceable by the AG as an unlawful merchandising practice.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Lewis (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1747AI content disclosure cause of actionMonitor

HB 1747 lets people sue when realistic AI-generated images, video, or audio are passed off as real without an AI-origin mark; a House substitute makes the mark voluntary as a liability shield.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Miller (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Kansas KS

Balanced · Flagship: SB 499
54
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Multiple chatbot/companion-AI and AI-training restriction bills plus health-AI transparency are active, but a study-only task force and no comprehensive regime keep it balanced.
Score breakdown Net index 54/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 3 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Kansas AI bills impose chatbot age-verification, transparency, training prohibitions, and physician-review mandates on tech and insurance firms, creating new compliance costs, private-lawsuit liability, and AG enforcement exposure.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
AG Kris Kobach (R)
Senate Federal and State Affairs • SB 405
“Artificial intelligence chatbots have created a host of problems, especially for children. They have encouraged teen suicide. They have generated child sexual abuse material.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Modernization Committee
Committee · HB 2592
Study-only task force on AI impacts and government uses.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Fed & State Affairs
Committee · SB 499
Bundles minor design code, replica rights, chatbot transparency.
K-12 Budget R
Rep. · HB 2671
Age verification and parental consent for companion AI.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 499Design code, digital-replica, chatbot transparencyOppose

SB 499 bundles three acts: an age-appropriate design code limiting compulsive minor use, a ban on nonconsensual digital replicas, and a chatbot-transparency act, with private rights of action and AG enforcement.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Fed & State Affairs (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 405Ban training AI for harmful conductOppose

SB 405 makes it unlawful to knowingly train AI or chatbots to encourage suicide, pose as a licensed professional, simulate a human, or encourage isolation, with civil penalties up to $50,000 per violation.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Fed & State Affairs (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2671Kansas CHAT Act: companion chatbot age checkOppose

HB 2671 (Kansas CHAT Act) requires companion-chatbot providers to verify ages, obtain parental consent for minors, and block explicit and suicidal-ideation content, with AG enforcement and a compliance safe harbor.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: K-12 Budget (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2592AI and emerging technologies task forceSupport

HB 2592 creates the Kansas Task Force on AI and Emerging Technologies to study risks, workforce effects, and regulatory needs, reporting annually until it expires in 2028.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Modernization Cmte (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 467AI medical necessity transparencyMonitor

SB 467 (Use of AI in Medical Decisions Transparency Act) requires insurers' AI tools to be transparent and nondiscriminatory and mandates a licensed physician make every final medical-necessity determination.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Holscher (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Alabama AL

Balanced · Flagship: SB 63
52
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Narrow health-AI and data-privacy rules plus a deepfake-disclosure bill, balanced by pro-innovation measures pushing agencies to use AI to cut red tape.
Score breakdown Net index 52/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 1 restrictive/Oppose bills · 3 monitor
What this means for AI companies: AI firms selling into Alabama face guardrails — human-final review for health-coverage AI, mandatory labeling of generative content, and consumer data-privacy duties — balanced by state adoption of regulatory-review AI.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. Randy Shaw (R)
Alabama House Floor • Apr 8, 2026
“This is SB 63. It regulates AI use in health benefit plans. Decisions must be based on medical necessity, history, unique circumstances, and specific information about a patient.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Chris Elliott R
Sen. · SB 328
Mandates agencies use agentic AI to cut regulatory burden.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Arthur Orr R
Sen. · SB 63
Bars AI-only coverage denials; mandates human review and fairness certifications.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 63Regulate AI in health coverage decisionsOppose

SB 63 bars health insurers from relying solely on AI to deny or reduce coverage and requires a qualified professional to make final authorization decisions. It mandates enrollee disclosure and annual AI fairness/accuracy certifications; enacted.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Orr (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 328Agentic AI review of agency rulesSupport

SB 328 (Agentic AI Regulatory Review Act) requires agencies to use agentic AI to review all rules and guidance quarterly for compliance, cost, and clarity. Human staff must approve any AI recommendations, with annual reports on savings.

Government Use · Sponsor: Elliott (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 351Alabama Personal Data Protection ActMonitor

HB 351 enacts the Alabama Personal Data Protection Act, granting access, correction, deletion, and opt-out rights over personal data. It imposes consent, minimization, and security duties with AG enforcement; enacted.

Data/Privacy · Sponsor: Shaw (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 129Disclosure of AI-generated contentMonitor

SB 129 requires generative-AI developers to conspicuously disclose AI-generated images, video, or audio. Violations are unlawful trade practices enforceable by the AG with a private right of action.

Deepfakes/Elections · Sponsor: Melson (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 56Limit facial recognition as sole arrest basisMonitor

SB 56 prohibits law enforcement from using a facial-recognition match as the sole basis for probable cause or arrest; matches must be corroborated by other evidence. Enacted as Act 2022-420.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Orr (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Arizona AZ

Balanced · Flagship: HB 2592
52
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: A strongly pro-innovation agency-AI deregulation bill and AI-education measures sit alongside advancing restrictive bills (high-risk AG certification, chatbot liability), netting balanced.
Score breakdown Net index 52/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 2 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Arizona leans pro-innovation — pushing state AI adoption and curbing agency rulemaking — while pending mandates on disclosures, provenance, and AG-certified risk audits would add compliance costs.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. presenting HB 2592 (R)
House Democratic Caucus Calendar • Feb 10, 2026
“Requires every budget unit to identify opportunities to implement AI solutions that reduce administrative burden and eliminate regulations that unnecessarily restrict AI innovation.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Justin Wilmeth R
Rep. · HB 2592
Pushes AI adoption and blocks agency AI regulation absent authorization.
Alexander Kolodin R
Rep. · HB 2409
Voluntary AI literacy and small-business AI-tool program.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Stacey Travers D
Rep. · HB 4098
Mandates bias audits and AG certification before high-risk AI ships.
Tony Rivero R
Rep. · HB 2311
Minor-disclosure and safety mandates on chatbots; sent to Governor.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 2592Agencies adopt AI; bar agency AI rulemakingSupport

HB 2592 directs state agencies to find opportunities to adopt AI that reduces administrative burden and to eliminate rules that restrict AI innovation. It bars agencies from regulating AI without express legislative delegation.

Government Use · Sponsor: Wilmeth (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 4098High-risk AI assessments, AG certificationOppose

HB 4098 regulates high-risk AI businesses, requiring risk assessments, transparency reports, bias mitigation, and quarterly audits. Systems must be certified by the AG before entering commerce, with civil penalties.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Travers (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2311Conversational AI minor-protection rulesOppose

HB 2311 regulates public-facing conversational AI to protect minors, mandating disclosure that users are interacting with AI and restricting harmful interactions. It requires privacy and safety controls, effective 2027.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Rivero (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2409Statewide AI education programSupport

HB 2409 creates an AI Education Program offering a voluntary statewide course on digital hygiene and AI tools for small businesses. It teaches residents to spot manipulation and use AI for economic growth.

Education · Sponsor: Kolodin (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 1786Generative AI content provenanceMonitor

SB 1786 requires generative-AI providers to embed secure provenance data into AI-generated or altered video, image, or audio, aiming at transparency and deterring deception.

Deepfakes/Elections · Sponsor: Petersen (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Nebraska NE

Balanced · Flagship: LB 1083
52
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: The major restrictive frontier/chatbot/pricing bills were indefinitely postponed or folded into other vehicles, leaving an interim study to lead — net cautious-but-stalled, trending moderate.
Score breakdown Net index 52/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
0 enabling/Support bills · 4 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Nebraska pushed several AI consumer/child-safety bills (chatbot disclosure, frontier-model safety, anti-surveillance pricing) but all were postponed or folded into other bills in 2026, so no new AI mandates take effect yet.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Eliot Bostar
Banking, Commerce and Insurance • LB 1185
“The bill requires clear and conspicuous disclosure when a user is interacting with artificial intelligence, so no one, especially a minor, is misled into believing they are speaking with a real person.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Tanya Storer NP
Sen. · LR 421
Studies state/federal AI options; non-binding.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Tanya Storer NP
Sen. · LB 1083
Frontier/chatbot safety plans, civil penalties; killed.
Eliot Bostar NP
Sen. · LB 1185
Transparency and minor-protection duties; folded into LB525.
Dave Murman NP
Sen. · LB 939
Age verification on generative chatbots; killed.
Guereca
Sen. · LB 1006
Bans algorithmic personalized pricing; killed.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
LB 1083Transparency in AI Risk Management ActOppose

LB 1083 (Transparency in AI Risk Management Act) required large frontier developers and chatbot providers to publish public-safety and child-protection plans and report incidents to the AG, with whistleblower protection. Indefinitely postponed.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Storer · Open bill on USLege →
LR 421Interim study of AI legislationMonitor

LR 421 is an interim study resolution examining current state and federal AI legislation on public-safety and child-protection risks, to inform future Nebraska action.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Storer · Open bill on USLege →
LB 1185Conversational AI Safety ActOppose

LB 1185 (Conversational AI Safety Act) regulated public chatbots, requiring AI-interaction disclosure, minor safeguards, and crisis protocols, with AG enforcement. Portions amended into LB 525.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Bostar · Open bill on USLege →
LB 939Saving Human Connection ActOppose

LB 939 (Saving Human Connection Act) regulated generative-AI chatbots with human-like features, requiring age verification, transparency, and emergency-response systems to protect minors. Indefinitely postponed.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Murman · Open bill on USLege →
LB 1006Protecting Consumers from Predatory PricingOppose

LB 1006 (Protecting Consumers and Jobs from Predatory Pricing Act) banned personalized algorithmic/surveillance pricing built on consumer data, with disclosure and AG enforcement. Indefinitely postponed.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Guereca · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Ohio OH

Balanced · Flagship: HB 392
52
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Pro-innovation Right to Compute Act is advancing, but competes with restrictive sector mandates (employment, insurer, watermarking) and an AI licensing/liability regime.
Score breakdown Net index 52/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 4 restrictive/Oppose bills · 0 monitor
What this means for AI companies: AI firms gain Ohio regulatory certainty under HB 392, but insurers, employers using hiring tools, and AI-content vendors face new disclosure, human-review, watermarking, and licensing compliance burdens.
No video clip available
Ohio legislative video is copyright/state-law restricted; the platform blocks clip creation (confirmed on the HB 392 hearing, video 33742).
View source hearing on USLege →
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Tex Fischer R
Rep. · HB 392
Limits compute regulation to narrowly tailored interests. Advancing.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Mathews R
Rep. · HB 628
AI verification licensing regime and safety council.
Ismail Mohamed D
Rep. · HB 828
Bans sole AI reliance in hiring; mandates human review.
Al Cutrona R
Sen. · SB 164
Bans sole-AI medical-necessity decisions; annual reporting.
Christine Cockley D
Rep. · HB 813
Mandatory watermarking with AG enforcement and private action.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 392Ohio Right to Compute ActSupport

HB 392 (Ohio Right to Compute Act) limits government regulation of computational resources to measures narrowly tailored to compelling interests like critical-infrastructure protection, while mandating federally-aligned risk-management for AI controlling critical infrastructure — signaling Ohio is open to AI investment.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Fischer (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 628License AI risk-mitigation organizationsOppose

HB 628 creates a state licensing system for independent organizations that assess and certify AI models for risk mitigation, with monitoring, reporting, and revocation rules, an AI Safety Advisory Council, and liability protections for verified systems.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Mathews (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 828Regulate automated employment decision toolsOppose

HB 828 regulates employers' use of automated employment-decision tools, barring sole reliance, requiring human review, mandating advance written notice to workers, and granting a right to a non-automated assessment.

Employment · Sponsor: Mohamed (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 164Regulate AI use by health insurersOppose

SB 164 regulates health insurers' use of AI in utilization review, requiring annual reporting and barring medical-necessity decisions made solely by AI without qualified-professional review, with audits.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Cutrona (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 813Watermark AI products; disclose AIOppose

HB 813 requires AI-generated products to carry a distinctive watermark disclosing AI origin and mandates disclosure when AI emulates human behavior, with AG complaints, civil penalties, and a private right of action.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Cockley (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Tennessee TN

Balanced · Flagship: HB 1455
52
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Enacted criminal AI-training and chatbot laws plus health-insurance human-review efforts, but skews toward narrow harm-prevention and study bills rather than a broad cross-sector regime.
Score breakdown Net index 52/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 2 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: AI chatbot and frontier-model providers face Tennessee criminal liability, mandatory child-safety/transparency plans, and incident reporting — raising compliance, legal-exposure, and product-design costs for consumer-facing AI.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. Mary Littleton (R)
House Criminal Justice Subcommittee • Mar 25, 2026 • HB 1455
“This is an AI bill we've worked hard on… it creates a Class A felony offense for a person to knowingly operate an AI system or AI chatbot to encourage suicide.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
White R
Sen. · SB 677
Free AI literacy course for teachers. Enacted.
Watson R
Sen. · SB 1363
AG study of AI in unfair/deceptive practices.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Mary Littleton R
Rep. · HB 1455
Class A felony for training AI toward harmful functions. Enacted.
Yager R
Sen. · SB 2171
Frontier-AI safety plans and incident reporting to AG.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 1455Criminalizing harmful AI trainingOppose

HB 1455 creates a Class A felony for knowingly training or operating an AI system or chatbot to encourage suicide, simulate a licensed mental-health professional, form emotional relationships, or impersonate humans, with a civil cause of action, effective July 2026.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Littleton (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 2171AI Public Safety & Child Protection TransparencyOppose

SB 2171 (AI Public Safety and Child Protection Transparency Act) requires large frontier developers and chatbot providers to adopt and publish safety plans addressing catastrophic and child-safety risks and report critical incidents to the AG.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Yager (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 677AI teacher professional developmentSupport

SB 677 directs the education department to offer a free asynchronous professional-development course on classroom AI for grades 6-12 teachers, who must complete it by August 2027.

Education · Sponsor: White (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 1363AG study of AI deceptive trade practicesMonitor

SB 1363 requires the AG to study how AI was used in unfair or deceptive trade practices during 2024-2025, reporting to legislative committees by mid-2026 to inform consumer-protection policy.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Watson (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2586AI fraud detection reportingMonitor

HB 2586 extends an AI-related reporting deadline to December 2026 with annual reports thereafter and requires reports to include recommendations to detect and minimize AI-enabled fraud.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Chism (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Louisiana LA

Balanced · Flagship: SB 474
50
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Mix of enabling resolutions and education-AI promotion against several restrictive bills (insurance fairness, chatbot regulation, frontier-AI risk act), with key mandates withdrawn or stalled.
Score breakdown Net index 50/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 3 restrictive/Oppose bills · 0 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Louisiana businesses face new AI compliance: frontier developers need audits and incident reporting; insurers must run disparate-impact audits; chatbot operators owe consent, transparency, and product liability.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Gregory Miller (R)
Senate Commerce • Apr 15, 2026 • SB 474
“Louisiana sits on top of a disproportionate share of America's critical infrastructure… A cyber incident at any of these choke points cascades into national fuel prices, food supply, and public health within days.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Josh Carlson R
Rep. · HR 320
Resolution urging AI education adoption. Adopted.
Mark Wright R
Rep. · HR 317
Study subcommittee on AI and emerging tech. Adopted.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Gregory Miller R
Sen. · SB 474
Frontier-AI risk frameworks, audits, incident reporting.
Edmond Jordan D
Rep. · HB 880
Anti-discrimination audits and human review in insurance.
Delisha Boyd D
Rep. · HB 791
Consent, transparency, product liability for chatbots.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 474Protecting Infrastructure from AI Risk ActOppose

SB 474 (Protecting Louisiana's Infrastructure from AI Risk Act) requires large frontier developers to publish risk frameworks, undergo third-party audits, report critical incidents, and protect whistleblowers, targeting catastrophic risks to energy and port infrastructure.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Miller (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 880AI Insurance Fairness ActOppose

HB 880 (AI Insurance Fairness Act) regulates AI in insurance underwriting, rating, and claims — banning discriminatory inputs, mandating annual disparate-impact audits, and guaranteeing consumer explanation and human review.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Jordan (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 791Regulation of AI chatbotsOppose

HB 791 sets rules for AI chatbots, requiring affirmative consent for data processing and transparency that users are interacting with a bot, banning advertising-profiling, and imposing product liability.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Boyd (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HR 320Promote AI education for studentsSupport

HR 320 (2025) urges education agencies to promote AI education for students and professional development for faculty, calling for flexible AI learning tools to build a future-ready workforce.

Education · Sponsor: Carlson (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HR 317Study AI, blockchain, cryptoSupport

HR 317 (2025) directs the House Commerce Committee to study AI, blockchain, and cryptocurrency impacts on Louisiana, with public hearings and a report due February 2026.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Wright (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

California CA

Balanced · Flagship: SB 53
48
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Enacted SB 53 frontier-model transparency and is advancing a heavy slate of binding AI mandates (workplace, healthcare, automated decisions, auditor licensing) alongside enabling frameworks.
Score breakdown Net index 48/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
0 enabling/Support bills · 4 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: California AI firms face layered transparency, safety-reporting, auditing, and sector-specific disclosure mandates, with the heaviest burdens on large frontier developers and automated-decision and healthcare AI deployers.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Scott Wiener (D)
Assembly Privacy & Consumer Protection • Jul 16, 2025
“This bill is not about liability. It's about transparency… it will require transparency for large companies' safety and security protocols and risk evaluations.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
No clearly identified AI allies on the record.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Rebecca Bauer-Kahan D
Asm. · AB 1018
Broad ADS mandates: evals, appeals, civil liability. Stalled.
Liz Ortega D
Asm. · AB 2575
Developer/user liability and clinician override mandates.
Nick Schultz D
Asm. · AB 1898
Worker notice and penalties for employment-decision AI.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 53Frontier AI model transparency & safetyMonitor

SB 53 (Transparency in Frontier AI Act) requires large frontier-model developers to publish safety frameworks managing catastrophic risks and confidentially report critical safety incidents, plus whistleblower protections. It also creates CalCompute, a public cloud for equitable AI research.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Wiener (D) · Open bill on USLege →
AB 1018Automated Decisions Safety ActOppose

AB 1018 (Automated Decisions Safety Act) regulates ADS making consequential decisions, requiring developer performance evaluations and deployer disclosure and appeals. It mandates transparency, AG access, and civil actions.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Bauer-Kahan (D) · Open bill on USLege →
AB 1405AI auditors: enrollment & conductOppose

AB 1405 requires AI auditors to enroll with the Government Operations Agency, pay a fee, and follow conduct rules, establishing an enrollment fund and misconduct-reporting mechanisms.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Bauer-Kahan (D) · Open bill on USLege →
AB 2575Healthcare AI transparency & overrideOppose

AB 2575 sets rules for clinical decision-support AI, requiring transparency to clinicians, protecting their right to override AI, and assigning liability to developers and users. It shields workers from retaliation tied to AI use.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Ortega (D) · Open bill on USLege →
AB 1898Workplace AI tool disclosureOppose

AB 1898 requires employers to notify workers when AI affects employment decisions or surveillance, with detailed disclosures and acknowledgment, plus enforcement and penalties.

Employment · Sponsor: Schultz (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 813AI Standards & Safety CommissionMonitor

SB 813 lets the AG designate private multistakeholder regulatory organizations to certify AI for safety; certified developers gain a rebuttable presumption of reasonable care in injury claims.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: McNerney (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Iowa IA

Balanced · Flagship: SF 2417
48
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: A conversational-AI chatbot mandate was signed and government-AI/health bills advanced, but pro-innovation AI-ownership and narrow scope keep it mid-range.
Score breakdown Net index 48/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 1 restrictive/Oppose bills · 3 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Iowa businesses deploying public-facing AI chatbots must add disclosure, minor-safeguard, and crisis protocols under SF 2417, raising compliance costs while clarifying AI output-ownership rights.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. Aime Wichtendahl (D-Linn)
House Floor • Apr 15, 2026 • SF 2417 (passed 95-0)
“Protecting children from manipulative chatbots was a priority… this provides important common sense protections for Iowa's children when they use generative AI.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Tech Committee
Committee · SF 2199
Clarifies users/trainers own AI output and models.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Tech Committee
Committee · SF 2417
AI disclosure, minor safeguards, mental-health protocols. Signed.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SF 2417Conversational AI services requirementsOppose

SF 2417 sets rules for public-facing conversational AI, requiring disclosure that users are interacting with AI and safeguards protecting minors from harmful content, plus mental-health crisis protocols. Signed into law May 2026.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Tech Cmte (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SF 2199Ownership of AI output and trained AISupport

SF 2199 defines AI terms and sets ownership rules: users own output created from their input, those who lawfully train an AI own the system, and employers own AI work created on the job.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Tech Cmte (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SSB 3014State agency AI use & employee protectionsMonitor

SSB 3014 creates a framework governing state agencies' use of AI, including automated employment-decision tools, requiring AI inventories and usage reports and barring uses that harm employee rights.

Government Use · Sponsor: Tech Cmte (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SF 2421Limit AI in insurer prior authorizationMonitor

SF 2421 regulates utilization-review AI in prior-authorization decisions, requiring qualified peer review before denials, with timelines and appeals. Withdrawn in March 2026.

Healthcare · Sponsor: HHS Cmte (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SF 2106Ban algorithmic rent price-fixingMonitor

SF 2106 (Residential Rent Fairness and Anticollusion Act) bars landlords with 5+ units from price-fixing and from using algorithmic rent-setting tools that coordinate off nonpublic competitor data, with civil penalties.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Staed (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Virginia VA

Balanced · Flagship: SB 1214
48
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Repeatedly advances high-risk AI mandates and training-data transparency acts alongside study resolutions; comprehensive HB 2094-style bills stall but signal strong regulatory appetite.
Score breakdown Net index 48/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates mostly government-use (friendlier)
0 enabling/Support bills · 2 restrictive/Oppose bills · 3 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Businesses selling AI to Virginia public bodies face new transparency, impact-assessment, and anti-discrimination duties enforced through procurement, while AI developers confront provenance, disclosure, and liability mandates.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Del. (House Appropriations presenter)
House Appropriations • SB 1214 companion
“High-risk artificial intelligence… identical to Senate Bill 1214, Senator Aird's bill, which passed the Senate 40 yes, zero no.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Anthony D
Rep. · HB 2268
Creates AG enforcement division for AI and privacy.
Pekarsky D
Sen. · SB 394
Board guidelines plus AI education pilot. Advancing.
Stacey Carroll D
Del. · HB 1170
DCJS model policy for law-enforcement AI.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Lashrecse Aird D
Sen. · SB 1214
Transparency, impact-assessment, anti-discrimination duties on public AI.
Michelle Lopes Maldonado D
Del. · HB 2121
Provenance data on synthetic content; AG civil penalties.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 1214High-risk AI use by public bodiesOppose

SB 1214 establishes a framework for high-risk AI developed, deployed, or used by Virginia public bodies, directing the CIO to set transparency, risk-management, and impact-assessment standards against algorithmic discrimination, enforced via procurement contracts. Passed Senate 40-0; left in House Appropriations.

Government Use · Sponsor: Aird (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2121Digital Content Authenticity & Transparency ActOppose

HB 2121 (Digital Content Authenticity and Transparency Act) would require generative-AI developers to attach standardized provenance data to synthetic content and offer public tools to read it, with AG enforcement. Left in committee.

Data/Privacy · Sponsor: Maldonado (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2268Emerging Tech, Cybersecurity, Privacy DivisionMonitor

HB 2268 creates a Division of Emerging Technologies, Cybersecurity, and Data Privacy within the Department of Law to enforce AI, cybersecurity, and privacy laws, with investigation and audit powers. Left in Appropriations.

Government Use · Sponsor: Anthony (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 394AI for student instruction; pilotMonitor

SB 394 directs the Board of Education to issue AI-use guidelines for K-12 and creates an AI Innovation in Education Pilot Program prioritizing under-resourced populations, with a 2030 sunset. Advanced.

Education · Sponsor: Pekarsky (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1170Law-enforcement AI use policyMonitor

HB 1170 requires the Department of Criminal Justice Services to establish a model policy governing law-enforcement use of AI in investigations, barring discriminatory use. Tabled 21-1 in committee.

Government Use · Sponsor: Carroll (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Michigan MI

Balanced · Flagship: HB 5899
47
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: A pro-innovation state AI pilot advancing alongside restrictive frontier-model safety, insurer-AI bans, and algorithmic-pricing bills produces a genuinely mixed posture.
Score breakdown Net index 47/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 3 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Mixed: HB 5899 and SB 991 ease/constrain AI commerce; HB 4668 imposes audit/transparency burdens on large AI developers; HB 4536 and SB 760 restrict AI in insurance and kids' chatbots.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. Jaime Greene (R)
House Communications and Technology • HB 5899
“Has anybody ever wanted government to be more efficient?… that is the intention and the heart of the AI pilot program.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Jaime Greene R
Rep. · HB 5899
Enables responsible generative-AI adoption across government. Advancing.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Sarah Lightner R
Rep. · HB 4668
Frontier-model safety protocols, audits, civil penalties.
Carrie Rheingans D
Rep. · HB 4536
Prohibits insurers using AI to deny/delay claims.
McMorrow D
Sen. · SB 991
Prohibits surveillance/protected-class algorithmic pricing.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 5899State AI pilot program for agenciesSupport

HB 5899 (AI Pilot Program Act) creates a governor-appointed board and a fund to let state agencies test generative AI under DTMB oversight, with reporting on efficiency gains and risks for legislative evaluation.

Government Use · Sponsor: Greene (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 4668AI safety transparency for large developersOppose

HB 4668 (AI Safety and Security Transparency Act) requires large foundation-model developers to adopt, follow, and publish safety/security protocols managing critical risks, with risk-assessment reports, independent audits, whistleblower protection, and civil penalties.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Lightner (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 4536Ban AI-based health insurer denialsOppose

HB 4536 amends the Insurance Code to prohibit health insurers from denying, modifying, or delaying claims based on reviews conducted using AI, ensuring AI does not solely drive adverse coverage decisions.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Rheingans (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 991Ban algorithmic personalized pricingOppose

SB 991 amends the Consumer Protection Act to ban personalized algorithmic pricing based on consumer or device attributes including geolocation and protected-class data, with exceptions.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: McMorrow (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 760Companion chatbots for minors restrictedMonitor

SB 760 (Leading Ethical AI Development for Kids Act) regulates companion-chatbot operators and restricts their behaviors toward minors, barring harmful interactions with civil penalties.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Polehanki (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Pennsylvania PA

Balanced · Flagship: SB 939
45
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Heavy regulatory volume — AI transparency, healthcare, chatbot, deepfake and pricing mandates — partly offset by an actively advancing pro-innovation AI/data-center regulatory sandbox.
Score breakdown Net index 45/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 4 restrictive/Oppose bills · 0 monitor
What this means for AI companies: PA AI bills hit companies with disclosure, human-review, transparency-labeling, and pricing duties across healthcare, insurance, chatbots, and platforms — raising compliance costs but offering data-center sandbox incentives.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. Arvind Venkat (D)
House Communications & Technology • May 5, 2026 • HB 1925
“For regulators, for the public, for the General Assembly, we are flying blind. We don't know when AI is being used.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Greg Rothman R
Sen. · SB 939
Waives licensing for sandbox; expedites data-center permits. Advancing.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Arvind Venkat D
Rep. · HB 1925
Disclosure, nondiscrimination, annual compliance; tabled.
Jason Ortitay R
Rep. · HB 2534
Embed disclosures and detection tools; AG-enforced.
Melissa Shusterman D
Rep. · HB 2175
Transparency and advertising duties on chatbots.
Ryan Bizzarro D
Rep. · HB 2384
Bans AI-adaptive pricing on essential goods.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 939AI & Data Center regulatory sandboxSupport

SB 939 establishes an Office of Transformation and an AI, Data Center and Emerging Technology Regulatory Sandbox letting participants test products with licensing waived up to 12 months, plus expedited permitting for high-impact, self-powered data centers.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Rothman (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1925Regulate AI in health facilities & insurersOppose

HB 1925 creates a framework for AI in healthcare facilities, insurers, and Medicaid/CHIP managed care, mandating patient disclosure and a human decision-maker in utilization review and clinical decisions, with annual attestations and penalties.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Venkat (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2534AI transparency & provenance mandatesOppose

HB 2534 (AI Transparency Act) requires large generative-AI providers and platforms to embed origin disclosures in AI-generated content and offer free detection tools, with AG enforcement.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Ortitay (R) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2175Consumer protection rules for AI chatbotsOppose

HB 2175 creates consumer-protection rules for AI chatbots, requiring suppliers to safeguard personal and health data, limit AI-driven advertising, and disclose chatbot capabilities, enforced by the Bureau of Consumer Protection.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Shusterman (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2384Prohibit AI dynamic pricing on essentialsOppose

HB 2384 amends unfair-trade-practice law to prohibit dynamic pricing on essential goods/services that varies within 24 hours based on demand, including via adaptive AI, excluding bona fide non-deceptive pricing.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Bizzarro (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Hawaii HI

Cautious · Flagship: SB 3001
42
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Heavy volume with a comprehensive chatbot-safety act enrolled to the Governor, but several enabling/study measures (AI Institute, advisory council) balance the restrictive tilt.
Score breakdown Net index 42/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 3 restrictive/Oppose bills · 0 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Hawaii businesses deploying conversational or companion AI face new disclosure mandates, minor-safety design rules, audit/reporting duties, and AG-enforced penalties, raising compliance costs.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. Trish La Chica (D)
House Floor • Mar 10, 2026 • HB 1782
“We all support technology and innovation, but as this technology moves forward rapidly, our responsibility to protect young people must evolve with it.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Donna Mercado Kim D
Sen. · SB 1622
Funds AI research and workforce development.
Ichiyama D
Rep. · HB 2597
Builds public AI chatbot and governance tools.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Jarrett Keohokalole D
Sen. · SB 3001
Disclosures, minor protections, crisis protocols, penalties. Enrolled.
Trish La Chica D
Rep. · HB 1782
Design mandates and age assurance for companion AI.
Karl Rhoads D
Sen. · SB 59
Annual audits, notice, civil penalties on algorithmic decisions.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 3001AI Disclosure & Safety Act (conversational AI)Oppose

SB 3001 (AI Disclosure and Safety Act) requires conversational-AI operators to tell users they're talking to AI, build suicide/self-harm protocols, and protect minors, with annual crisis-intervention reports and deceptive-practice penalties. Enrolled to the Governor.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Keohokalole (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1782Regulate AI companion systems for minorsOppose

HB 1782 creates safeguards for AI companion systems used by minors — transparency, parental controls, age assurance, and bans on harmful design like simulated romance — with AG enforcement.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: La Chica (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 59Algorithmic discrimination auditsOppose

SB 59 establishes rules for algorithmic decision-making, barring discrimination on protected characteristics, requiring consumer notice, annual audits and AG reporting, and civil penalties.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Rhoads (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 1622UH Aloha Intelligence InstituteSupport

SB 1622 creates the Aloha Intelligence Institute at the University of Hawaii to advance AI research, workforce development, ethics, and public-private partnerships, with biannual reports.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Kim (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2597State data hub with public AI chatbotSupport

HB 2597 directs the Chief Data Officer to add a public-facing AI chatbot to Hawaii's open-data portal and requires AI governance tools and an agency AI use-case/vendor reporting system.

Government Use · Sponsor: Ichiyama (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

North Carolina NC

Cautious · Flagship: H 1161
42
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Heavy activity including an advancing omnibus AI bill, high-impact-model safety rules, employment auditing and worker-displacement mandates, offset partly by sandbox and developer-immunity measures.
Score breakdown Net index 42/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 2 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: NC pairs innovation incentives (S 735 fund, S 747 sandbox) with strict guardrails (H 1161, H 375) on hiring tools, insurance, and synthetic media — raising compliance, disclosure, and liability costs for AI vendors and deployers.
No video clip available
USLege transcript-search returned persistent failures across candidate NC videos, and top matches were local board/council meetings, not legislative AI hearings; no verifiable clip could be created.
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
DeAndrea Salvador D
Sen. · S 747
AI policy office and sandbox for regulated experimentation.
Jake Johnson R
Rep. · H 934
Shields developers when professionals misuse products.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Carolyn Logan D
Rep. · H 1161
Hiring-tool audits, insurance and court limits; broad mandates.
DeAndrea Salvador D
Sen. · S 735
Funds AI but imposes safety protocols on high-impact models.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
H 1161Omnibus AI protections across sectorsOppose

H 1161 (Omnibus AI Protections) imposes guardrails across elections, education, employment, courts, and insurance — banning AI in political ads, mandating audits/disclosure for AI hiring tools, and restricting AI in insurance and courts, with appropriations for oversight.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Logan (D) · Open bill on USLege →
S 735AI Innovation Trust Fund + safety rulesOppose

S 735 (AI Innovation Trust Fund Act) creates a fund to support AI development while imposing safety, cybersecurity, and risk-assessment requirements on high-impact-model developers, with AG enforcement.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Salvador (D) · Open bill on USLege →
S 747AI Learning Agenda & regulatory sandboxSupport

S 747 establishes an Office of AI Policy within Commerce and an AI Learning Laboratory for regulated experimentation, with a learning agenda, state AI inventory, and regulatory mitigations balancing innovation and protection.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Salvador (D) · Open bill on USLege →
H 934AI Regulatory Reform Act; developer immunitySupport

H 934 (AI Regulatory Reform Act) creates a criminal offense for harmful deepfakes and civil remedies, and grants AI developers immunity when products are used by learned professionals, shifting liability to those professionals.

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Johnson (R) · Open bill on USLege →
H 375AI and Synthetic Media Act (elections)Monitor

H 375 (AI and Synthetic Media Act) regulates AI-generated synthetic media, requiring disclosures in political messaging, banning deceptive election deepfakes, and criminalizing fabricated intimate images and CSAM.

Deepfakes/Elections · Sponsor: Warren (R) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Maine ME

Cautious · Flagship: HP 1451
40
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Two AI-related bills signed (therapy AI limits, classroom-tech study) plus a comprehensive privacy act and a minors-chatbot access ban advancing tilt it toward active regulation.
Score breakdown Net index 40/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
0 enabling/Support bills · 3 restrictive/Oppose bills · 2 monitor
What this means for AI companies: AI vendors face Maine's strictest-in-region rules: age-gated minor chatbots (HP 1451), licensed-only AI mental-health tools (HP 1397), and broad data-privacy duties (HP 1220), raising compliance costs.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Rep. Poppy Arford (D)
HCIFS work session • HP 1397
“Why is 'diagnose, treat, or improve' used in the first one, and 'diagnose, treat, or address' — which I actually prefer? It's more of an umbrella.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Sargent D
Rep. · HP 1376
Study of school tech and AI safeguards. Signed.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Lori Gramlich D
Rep. · HP 1451
Bars minors from AI companions absent strict age verification.
Amy Kuhn D
Rep. · HP 1397
Confines therapy AI to administrative support. Signed.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HP 1451Restrict children's access to AI companionsOppose

HP 1451 bars AI chatbot deployers from letting minors use human-like AI chatbots or social companions unless strict conditions like robust age verification are met, with a narrow supervised-therapy exemption, plus data limits and a private right of action.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Gramlich (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HP 1397Regulate AI in mental health servicesOppose

HP 1397 lets licensed mental-health professionals use AI only for administrative and supplementary support, never independent therapeutic communication or clinical decisions, requiring informed consent. Signed into law April 2026.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Kuhn (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HP 1220Maine Online Data Privacy ActOppose

HP 1220 (Maine Online Data Privacy Act) gives residents rights to access, correct, delete, and opt out of sale or profiling of personal data starting July 2026, with tight limits on sensitive data.

Data/Privacy · Sponsor: Kuhn (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HP 1376Study classroom technology safeguardsMonitor

HP 1376 directs the Maine Education Policy Research Institute to survey schools on classroom technology and safety policies, including AI, with findings due December 2026. Emergency-signed April 2026.

Education · Sponsor: Sargent (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HP 25Regulate employer surveillance of workersMonitor

HP 25 regulates employer surveillance — requiring advance notice, restricting audiovisual monitoring of private spaces, and letting workers refuse surveillance apps on personal devices — with a private right of action. Left unsigned.

Employment · Sponsor: Roeder (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Maryland MD

Cautious · Flagship: SB 827
38
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Active multi-front regulation — chatbot product liability, AI product-liability and high-risk consumer-protection bills — though enacted measures lean enabling (AI-ready schools, AI partnership).
Score breakdown Net index 38/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 2 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Maryland imposes chatbot consent, disclosure, and product-liability duties (SB 827; HB 712), creating compliance and litigation exposure for AI developers and deployers, plus deepfake-fraud criminalization (SB 8).
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Katie Fry Hester (D)
Senate Finance • Mar 12, 2026 • SB 827
“Heaven forbid one of the suicides happens this year in the state of Maryland; right now there's no recourse for a parent.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Katie Fry Hester D
Sen. · SB 720
AI literacy and teacher training in K-12. Enacted.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Katie Fry Hester D
Sen. · SB 827
Consent, AI warnings, product-liability standards for chatbots.
Robin Grammer R
Del. · HB 712
Causes of action against AI developers for defective systems.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 827Curbing Harmful AI Technology Act (chatbots)Oppose

SB 827 (Curbing Harmful AI Technology Act) regulates AI chatbots to protect users, especially children under 13, via affirmative data-use consent, clear AI disclosures, and bans on targeted advertising, extending product-liability standards and allowing AG and individual suits.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Hester (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 712Product liability for AI systemsOppose

HB 712 creates a product-liability framework for AI systems, allowing suits against developers and deployers when defective or dangerous AI causes harm, with best-practice rebuttable presumptions and AG enforcement.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Grammer (R) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 720AI Ready Schools ActSupport

SB 720 (AI Ready Schools Act) directs the education department to issue AI guidance, require local school AI policies, and build K-12 AI literacy, creating an AI Education Collaborative. Enacted (Ch. 634).

Education · Sponsor: Hester (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 597Maryland AI Partnership in higher edSupport

SB 597 establishes the Maryland AI Partnership in the University System to coordinate AI for workforce and public good, adding training, scholarships, and an AI Incubation Lab. Enacted (Ch. 633).

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Hester (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 8Identity fraud — AI/deepfake representationsMonitor

SB 8 criminalizes malicious use of personal identifying information and use of AI or deepfakes to impersonate, defraud, or harm, with civil and criminal penalties. Enacted (Ch. 445).

Criminal/Fraud · Sponsor: Hester (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Connecticut CT

Very Restrictive · Flagship: SB 2
34
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Actively advancing comprehensive AI regulation — SB 2's high-risk algorithmic-discrimination regime and ADS employee bias-audit mandates — alongside enabling sandbox and small-business measures.
Score breakdown Net index 34/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
2 enabling/Support bills · 2 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: CT pairs pro-innovation moves (AI sandbox, small-business adoption) with new compliance duties: chatbot safeguards, employment bias audits, and election deepfake bans raising legal and operational costs.
No video clip available
Connecticut legislative video is copyright/state-law restricted; the platform blocks clip creation for all CT videos.
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Ned Lamont D
Gov. · SB 86
Governor's pro-innovation sandbox, Chief Data Officer, open data.
Commerce Committee
Committee · SB 417
Plans incentives for small-business AI adoption. Signed.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
James Maroney D
Sen. · SB 2
EU-AI-Act-style impact assessments and anti-discrimination duties.
Labor Committee
Committee · SB 435
Bias audits, transparency, human review for workplace ADS.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 2Comprehensive high-risk AI frameworkOppose

SB 2 (2025) creates a comprehensive framework regulating high-risk AI, requiring transparency, risk management, and impact assessments to prevent algorithmic discrimination. It also sets up advisory boards, AI education, and a regulatory sandbox.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Maroney (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 86AI innovation & regulatory sandboxSupport

SB 86 establishes a Chief Data Officer and an AI regulatory sandbox to spur innovation. It also regulates companion chatbots, requiring AI disclosure, safety protocols for minors, and annual AG reporting.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Lamont (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 435ADS protections for employeesOppose

SB 435 regulates automated employment-decision systems and workplace AI, mandating transparency, bias audits, and human review. It protects collective-bargaining rights over AI and restricts unauthorized agency AI use.

Employment · Sponsor: Labor Cmte · Open bill on USLege →
SB 417Small business AI adoption programSupport

SB 417 directs the economic-development department to design an AI Small Business Program incentivizing small firms to adopt AI for productivity, with a report due January 2027. Enacted.

Innovation/Task Force · Sponsor: Commerce Cmte · Open bill on USLege →
HB 5342Ban deceptive AI synthetic media near electionsMonitor

HB 5342 bans distributing deceptive AI synthetic media misrepresenting people within 90 days before an election and requires disclaimers outside that window, exempting bona fide news media.

Deepfakes/Elections · Sponsor: GAE Cmte · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Washington WA

Very Restrictive · Flagship: SB 6284
34
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Advancing broad high-risk AI consumer-protection mandates, training-data disclosure, and labor bargaining over AI, with several bills enacted; an enabling economic-development bill is the lone counterweight.
Score breakdown Net index 34/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
0 enabling/Support bills · 4 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: WA's high-risk AI bills impose impact-assessment, risk-management, and disclosure duties on developers/deployers, with chatbot, content-provenance, and AI-bargaining mandates raising compliance costs across tech, insurance, finance, and HR.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Marko Liias (D)
Senate Environment, Energy & Technology • Feb 3, 2026 • SB 6284
“I appreciated all the feedback in the public hearing. This is our first step in moving this important issue forward and making sure we're protecting Washingtonians.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
No clearly identified AI allies on the record.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Marko Liias D
Sen. · SB 6284
High-risk AI risk management, impact assessments, AG oversight.
Clyde Shavers D
Rep. · HB 2667
Companion high-risk AI mandate with developer/deployer duties.
Parshley D
Rep. · HB 1622
Forces public employers to bargain AI adoption.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 6284Consumer protections for AI systemsOppose

SB 6284 establishes a framework regulating high-risk AI making consequential decisions, requiring developers and deployers to adopt risk-management policies, conduct impact assessments, and disclose AI use, with AG enforcement (no private right of action) and an extended AI task force.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Liias (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2667Consumer protections for AI systemsOppose

HB 2667, the House companion, imposes transparency, accountability, and risk-management duties on high-risk AI developers and deployers against algorithmic discrimination, adding an AI task force and workplace advisory group.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Shavers (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1170Informing users of AI-developed contentOppose

HB 1170 requires large generative-AI providers with over 1M monthly Washington users to offer free AI-content detection tools and embed provenance disclosures, with conspicuous manifest disclosures and latent metadata. Effective Feb 2027.

Data/Privacy · Sponsor: Shavers (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 2225Regulating AI companion chatbotsMonitor

HB 2225 regulates AI companion chatbots, mandating disclosure the chatbot is artificial, protecting minors from explicit content, and requiring protocols for self-harm or suicidal expressions. Effective Jan 2027.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Callan (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1622Bargaining over use of AIOppose

HB 1622 amends labor law to require public employers to collectively bargain over adopting or modifying AI that affects employees' wages, hours, or working conditions.

Employment · Sponsor: Parshley (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

New York NY

Very Restrictive · Flagship: S 6953 (RAISE Act)
33
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Among the most restrictive — the frontier-model RAISE Act was signed into law (Dec 2025), making NY the second state after California, alongside enacted synthetic-performer rules and a comprehensive AI Civil Rights Act with audit mandates moving in committee.
Score breakdown Net index 33/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
0 enabling/Support bills · 4 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: NY's AI bills impose disclosure, licensing, civil-rights, anti-discrimination-pricing, and frontier-safety duties on developers and deployers, raising compliance costs but offering clearer rules for high-risk or consumer-facing AI.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Kristen Gonzalez (D)
Internet & Technology Cmte • NY AI Act
“This is the New York AI Act… I think we saw that there is still a huge issue of algorithmic bias, and so we're very excited to have gotten amendments from that hearing.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
No clearly identified AI allies on the record.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Andrew Gounardes D
Sen. · S 6953
Frontier-model safety mandate; signed into law Dec 2025 (Ch. 699).
Michaelle Solages D
Asm. · AB 9654
Sweeping algorithmic-discrimination regime with impact assessments.
Clyde Vanel D
Asm. · AB 3356
Registration and licensing of high-risk AI; very restrictive.
Torres D
Asm. · AB 6765
Bans protected-class pricing data; advancing to floor.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
S 6953RAISE Act — frontier AI model safetyOppose

S 6953 (RAISE Act) requires large frontier-model developers to implement safety and security protocols, keep records, and disclose to state authorities before deployment, barring models posing an unreasonable risk of critical harm. Signed into law (Ch. 699, Dec 2025).

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Gounardes (D) · Open bill on USLege →
AB 9654NY Artificial Intelligence Civil Rights ActOppose

AB 9654 (NY AI Civil Rights Act) governs covered algorithms in consequential decisions like employment, housing, credit, and health care, mandating discrimination prevention, transparency, notice, human review/appeal, and a private right of action.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Solages (D) · Open bill on USLege →
AB 3356Advanced AI Licensing ActOppose

AB 3356 (Advanced AI Licensing Act) creates a framework for high-risk AI requiring developers and operators to register, obtain licenses, and meet ethical standards under ongoing oversight, with prohibited uses and penalties.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Vanel (D) · Open bill on USLege →
AB 6765Preventing Algorithmic Pricing DiscriminationOppose

AB 6765 (Preventing Algorithmic Pricing Discrimination Act) bars surveillance-based personalized pricing without consumer notice and prohibits using protected-class data to set prices, with consumer suits and AG authority.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Torres (D) · Open bill on USLege →
S 8420Synthetic performer advertising disclosureMonitor

S 8420 requires ads featuring AI-generated 'synthetic performers' resembling humans to carry a conspicuous disclosure, with civil penalties, exempting expressive works and audio-only ads. Signed into law (Ch. 617).

Deepfakes/Elections · Sponsor: Gianaris (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Rhode Island RI

Very Restrictive · Flagship: H 7350
32
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Advancing a dense cluster of restrictive private-sector AI mandates — companion-model duties, healthcare/insurer oversight, and a comprehensive employment AI framework — several already transmitted to the Governor.
Score breakdown Net index 32/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
No comprehensive AI-Act regime Mandates reach the private sector
0 enabling/Support bills · 5 restrictive/Oppose bills · 0 monitor
What this means for AI companies: RI's regulatory wave hits AI vendors in health insurance, mental health, HR/hiring, companion apps, and rental pricing — mandating disclosure, human review, consent, and exposing noncompliant operators to AG enforcement and suits.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Linda Ujifusa (D)
Senate AI & Emerging Tech • Mar 24 • S 2010
“Artificial intelligence can be a powerful tool, but without guardrails, it can scale errors, delays, and denials.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
No clearly identified AI allies on the record.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Tina Spears D
Rep. · H 7350
Safety protocols and AG enforcement on companion AI. To Governor.
Thomas Noret D
Rep. · H 7767
Broad workplace AI/ADS regime; heavy employer burden.
Linda Ujifusa D
Sen. · S 2010
Disclosure and licensed-provider review of AI claims. Passed Senate.
Potter D
Rep. · H 7764
Prohibits algorithmic rent-setting; held in committee.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
H 7350AI companion model safety dutiesOppose

H 7350 creates a framework for AI companion models, requiring protocols for users' expressions of suicidal ideation or harm and clear notice the companion is not human, with private suits and AG enforcement. Transmitted to the Governor.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Spears (D) · Open bill on USLege →
H 7767Comprehensive AI & fair employment frameworkOppose

H 7767 establishes a framework regulating AI and electronic monitoring in employment, setting transparency, oversight, and anti-discrimination requirements for ADS, plus employee privacy and anti-retaliation rights. Held for study.

Employment · Sponsor: Noret (D) · Open bill on USLege →
S 2010Transparency in health insurer AI decisionsOppose

S 2010 (Transparency and Accountability in AI Use by Health Insurers Act) requires insurers to disclose AI tools to regulators and mandates same-license clinician review of AI-influenced coverage denials. Senate passed Sub A.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Ujifusa (D) · Open bill on USLege →
H 7349Oversight of AI in mental health careOppose

H 7349 (Oversight of AI in Mental Health Care Act) limits AI in therapy to administrative support, requires informed written consent, and bars AI from making therapeutic decisions independently. Transmitted to the Governor.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Spears (D) · Open bill on USLege →
H 7764Ban algorithmic rent pricingOppose

H 7764 amends the Residential Landlord and Tenant Act to prohibit landlords from using algorithmic devices incorporating nonpublic competitor data to set rent, effective January 2027. Held for study.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Potter (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Massachusetts MA

Very Restrictive · Flagship: H 77
30
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Multiple algorithmic-discrimination/ADS audit mandates and an AI employment-responsibility bill advancing out of committee, with only narrow enabling measures.
Score breakdown Net index 30/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
0 enabling/Support bills · 4 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: These bills impose audits, disclosure, and human-oversight duties on employers and AI vendors using automated decision systems, raising compliance costs while pro-AI economic-development efforts court investment and talent.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sec. Eric Paley, Economic Development
Joint Cmte on Economic Development & Emerging Technologies
“If we are not leveling up our workforce, we are in a terrible position to lose. People with AI skills are now being hired at 56% higher income.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
No clearly identified AI allies on the record.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Tricia Farley-Bouvier D
Rep. · H 77
Impact assessments and human oversight on employer ADS. Advancing.
Dylan Fernandes D
Sen. · S 35
Audits and oversight on employment ADS.
Liz Miranda D
Sen. · SD 3007
Broad ADS audit and opt-out across many sectors.
Rogers D
Rep. · H 495
Consent and environmental-impact reporting on AI search.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
H 77Fostering AI responsibility; employment ADSOppose

H 77 regulates AI and automated decision systems in employment and by state agencies, mandating transparency, impact assessments, meaningful human oversight, data privacy, and anti-retaliation protections. Reported favorably to House Ways and Means.

Employment · Sponsor: Farley-Bouvier (D) · Open bill on USLege →
S 35Fostering AI responsibility (Senate)Oppose

S 35, the Senate companion, governs electronic monitoring and ADS in employment, requiring independent-auditor impact assessments, data-use limits, and human oversight to prevent discrimination.

Employment · Sponsor: Fernandes (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SD 3007Non-discrimination by algorithmic systemsOppose

SD 3007 creates Chapter 151G prohibiting ADS from discriminating in employment, housing, education, and government services, requiring audits, documentation, opt-outs, and liability.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Miranda (D) · Open bill on USLege →
H 5094Synthetic media disclosure in political adsMonitor

H 5094 requires paid political audio/video using AI synthetic media to disclose that fact clearly throughout, with fines for noncompliance. Advanced to Senate Ways and Means.

Deepfakes/Elections · Sponsor: Ways & Means · Open bill on USLege →
H 495Reducing emissions from AIOppose

H 495 would require user consent before AI is used in search results, mandate an environmental-impact study, and require annual emissions disclosures. Shelved to a study order.

Data/Privacy · Sponsor: Rogers (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Vermont VT

Very Restrictive · Flagship: H 792
30
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: A prolific docket featuring AI liability standards, inherently-dangerous-AI oversight, and chatbot and healthcare mandates, with several enacted — among the most aggressive postures studied.
Score breakdown Net index 30/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
0 enabling/Support bills · 4 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Vermont AI bills impose disclosure, liability, and use restrictions on developers/deployers — especially in health, mental health, and consumer services — raising compliance costs but offering safe harbors for best-practice adopters.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Katie McLennan, Legislative Council
House Health Care markup • Mar 11, 2026 • H 816
“Safeguard individuals seeking mental health services by ensuring therapeutic judgment, clinical decision making, and therapeutic communication remain the responsibility of qualified mental health professionals, not AI.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
No clearly identified AI allies on the record.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Monique Priestley D
Rep. · H 792
Liability for high-impact and generative AI; conditional safe harbor.
Brian Cina D
Rep. · H 814
Mental-health chatbot standards and utilization-review limits. Enacted.
Daisy Berbeco D
Rep. · H 816
Bars AI from therapeutic decisions. Signed.
Zachary Harvey D
Rep. · H 855
Bars 'AI autonomously caused harm' as a defense.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
H 792Liability standards for AI developers/deployersOppose

H 792 establishes liability standards for developers and deployers of high-impact and generative AI, defining duties on safety, warnings, and risk mitigation, with safe-harbor protections for following recognized best practices.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Priestley (D) · Open bill on USLege →
H 814Neurological rights and AI in healthOppose

H 814 creates protections for neurological rights and regulates AI across health and human services, including mental-health chatbot standards, generative-AI disclosure, and limits on AI in insurance utilization review. Signed May 2026.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Cina (D) · Open bill on USLege →
H 816AI in mental health servicesOppose

H 816 bars AI from making therapeutic decisions or providing therapeutic communication, keeping clinical responsibility with licensed professionals while permitting administrative support. Signed June 2026.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Berbeco (D) · Open bill on USLege →
H 821AI advisory council & disclosuresMonitor

H 821 expands and extends Vermont's AI Advisory Council to 2030, tasking it with studying AI's impact on education, finance, and health, and mandates consumer disclosure when generative AI is used in services.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Cina (D) · Open bill on USLege →
H 855Defenses in AI-harm civil actionsOppose

H 855 prohibits civil defendants from arguing that AI autonomously caused the harm as a defense to liability, while allowing other defenses on causation and negligence.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Harvey (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Colorado CO

Very Restrictive · Flagship: SB 205 / SB 189
28
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Pioneered the comprehensive Colorado AI Act (SB 205); a 2026 rewrite (SB 189) narrowed it to ADMT disclosure rules and delayed the effective date to Jan 2027 — but enacted binding healthcare-AI, psychotherapy, and conversational-AI mandates keep Colorado among the most heavily regulated states.
Score breakdown Net index 28/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
1 enabling/Support bills · 4 restrictive/Oppose bills · 0 monitor
What this means for AI companies: Colorado businesses deploying AI face new disclosure, human-review, and liability duties for consequential decisions, plus tight limits on AI in health care, therapy, and minor-facing chatbots.
No video clip available
Colorado legislative video is copyright/state-law restricted; the platform blocks clip creation for all CO legislature videos.
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
Rep. · HB 1009
Industry-friendlier: delays to 2027, exempts small businesses.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
James Coleman D
Sen. · SB 189
2026 rewrite of SB 205: narrows to ADMT disclosure/transparency; delays effect to Jan 2027. Signed.
Junie Joseph D
Rep. · HB 1139
Human review of AI denials; bars unsupervised AI psychotherapy. Signed.
Sean Camacho D
Rep. · HB 1263
Disclosures, minor safeguards, suicide protocols, AG reporting. Signed.
Mabrey D
Rep. · HB 1195
Bars AI therapeutic interaction or emotion detection. Signed.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SB 189Revises Colorado AI Act; ADMT disclosureOppose

SB 189 creates a consumer-protection framework for automated decision-making technology (ADMT) in consequential decisions like employment, housing, and credit, requiring disclosure of AI use and consumer rights to data access, correction, and human review. The AG enforces violations as deceptive trade practices.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Coleman (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1139AI in health care & utilization reviewOppose

HB 1139 regulates AI in health care, requiring individualized clinical data and human review for AI utilization-review denials. It bars AI mental-health chatbots from practicing psychotherapy without disclosures and oversight.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Joseph (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1263Conversational AI operator requirementsOppose

HB 1263 sets operator requirements for public-facing conversational AI, focused on minors — mandating AI disclosure, restricting manipulative tactics, requiring suicidal-ideation protocols, and adding AG reporting and penalties.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Camacho (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1195Restrict AI in psychotherapyOppose

HB 1195 restricts AI in licensed psychotherapy, barring AI from therapeutic interaction, unapproved recommendations, or emotion detection. It limits AI to administrative support and requires written client consent for recording.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Mabrey (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 1009Narrow AI Act scope; delay; SMB exemptionsSupport

HB 1009 (2025 special session) narrows Colorado's AI law, limiting 'consequential decisions' to employment and public safety, delaying the effective date, and exempting small businesses and local governments.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: — · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Minnesota MN

Very Restrictive · Flagship: SF 4509
28
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: A dense cluster of restrictive bills — RAISE Act frontier safety, strict-liability chatbots, AI worker-displacement notice, insurer/government AI bans — with virtually no enabling counterweights.
Score breakdown Net index 28/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
0 enabling/Support bills · 5 restrictive/Oppose bills · 0 monitor
What this means for AI companies: These bills impose disclosure, liability, and restrictions on AI developers, deployers, insurers, employers, and chatbot makers operating in Minnesota — raising compliance costs and litigation exposure while limiting automated decisions in hiring, healthcare, and consumer products.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Sen. Erin Maye Quade (DFL)
Senate Commerce • SF 4997
“The way that consumer facing AI has been rolled out is a five alarm fire for our society with devastating and deadly consequences.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
No clearly identified AI allies on the record.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Erin Maye Quade D
Sen. · SF 4509
Frontier safety protocols, incident disclosure, private right of action.
Katie Jones D
Rep. · HF 4536
Prohibits government drafting official records with generative AI.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
SF 4509RAISE Act: AI safety and disclosureOppose

SF 4509 (RAISE Act) requires developers deploying AI models in Minnesota to implement safety and security protocols minimizing the risk of critical harm, disclose safety incidents, and faces civil penalties and a private right of action.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Maye Quade (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SF 4997AI chatbot requirements & strict liabilityOppose

SF 4997 sets requirements and liability for AI chatbots, mandating clear bot notice, barring chatbots from giving licensed professional advice, and imposing strict duties on companion chatbots to prevent self-harm risks, with strict liability effective August 2026.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Maye Quade (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SF 4576Notice/transition pay for AI-displaced workersOppose

SF 4576 requires employers with 50+ workers to give 90 days' notice before displacing 25+ employees via AI automation, with a 90-day transitional employment period, continued pay, and retraining, backed by penalties.

Employment · Sponsor: Maye Quade (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SF 3984Ban AI/algorithms in prior authorizationOppose

SF 3984 prohibits health insurers from using algorithms or AI to approve or deny prior-authorization requests, applying to plans issued or renewed on or after January 2026.

Healthcare · Sponsor: Maye Quade (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HF 4536Ban generative AI in government recordsOppose

HF 4536 bars government entities from using generative AI to create or draft official records, requiring retention of drafts and establishing civil remedies.

Government Use · Sponsor: Jones (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Illinois IL

Very Restrictive · Flagship: HB 4705
24
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: Highest regulatory volume — frontier-model safety mandates, product liability, algorithmic-discrimination notice, automated-decision human-control, and companion-AI rules advancing, with few enabling counterweights.
Score breakdown Net index 24/100
Innovation / enabling measures
Light private-sector mandate load
Enforcement restraint (less penalty/liability)
Comprehensive AI-Act regime advancing/enacted Mandates reach the private sector
0 enabling/Support bills · 4 restrictive/Oppose bills · 1 monitor
What this means for AI companies: AI developers, chatbot and companion-AI providers, and public-sector contractors face new Illinois transparency, liability, auditing, and human-oversight mandates, raising compliance costs and litigation exposure.
No video clip available
No recorded Illinois hearing video with transcripts was available on the platform across multiple queries and date ranges.
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
No clearly identified AI allies on the record.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
Daniel Didech D
Rep. · HB 4705
Frontier-model safety plans, incident reporting, audits, whistleblower mandates.
Rachel Ventura D
Sen. · SB 3502
Defective-design liability on AI developers and deployers.
Rashid D
Rep. · HB 4980
Human oversight and independent audits for public-employer ADS.
Mary Edly-Allen D
Sen. · SB 3262
Design standards and removes Section 230 immunity for companion AI.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
HB 4705AI Public Safety & Child Protection TransparencyOppose

HB 4705 (AI Public Safety and Child Protection Transparency Act) requires large frontier developers and chatbot providers to publish safety and child-protection plans and report incidents to the AG, with whistleblower protections, third-party audits, and penalties.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Didech (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 3502AI Product Liability / Design RequirementsOppose

SB 3502 (AI Design Requirements / Product Liability Act) makes developers and deployers of high-impact and generative AI liable for harm from defective design, inadequate warnings, or breach of warranty, with extra protections for minors.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Ventura (D) · Open bill on USLege →
HB 4980Meaningful Human Control of AI ActOppose

HB 4980 (Meaningful Human Control of AI Act) bars public employers and contractors from using ADS without ongoing human oversight, mandating independent impact assessments, appeals, transparency, and anti-retaliation protections.

Employment · Sponsor: Rashid (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 3262Companion AI Protection ActOppose

SB 3262 (Companion AI Protection Act) sets design standards for companion AI to prevent manipulation, requires crisis-intervention protocols and audits, removes Section 230 immunity, and penalizes violations.

Consumer Protection · Sponsor: Edly-Allen (D) · Open bill on USLege →
SB 3312AI Safety Measures Act / ILComputeMonitor

SB 3312 (AI Safety Measures Act) requires large frontier developers to maintain and disclose catastrophic-risk frameworks and report incidents, with civil penalties, and creates a public AI cloud consortium, ILCompute.

Comprehensive Regulation · Sponsor: Edly-Allen (D) · Open bill on USLege →
↑ Back to top

Montana MT

No data · Flagship: —
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: No current-session AI legislation is indexed (biennial legislature — 2025 session off-cycle for this snapshot). Shown as neutral/no-data.
What this means for AI companies: No indexed Montana AI legislation; the legislature is in study/monitoring mode via its innovation task force, so businesses face no new Montana-specific AI compliance burden yet.
USLege hearing clip previewUSLege hearing clip
Task Force staff (Blockchain & Digital Innovation)
Montana Blockchain and Digital Innovation Task Force
“States are experimenting with different approaches, and we can probably learn from some of those… a federal framework is likely coming, but it's not here yet.”
▶ Watch hearing clip (USLege)
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
No clearly identified AI allies on the record.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
No clearly identified AI skeptics on the record.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
No current-session AI bills indexed for Montana.
↑ Back to top

Nevada NV

No data · Flagship: —
AI-Friendly Index
Why this score: No current-session AI legislation is indexed (biennial legislature — relevant session not in this snapshot). Shown as neutral/no-data.
What this means for AI companies: No indexed Nevada AI bills; interim debate centers on AI data-center electricity/water demand, tax abatements, and AI in elections/education — signaling future regulation but no current statutory AI obligations on business.
No video clip available
Nevada (biennial legislature) has no indexed AI bills; AI surfaced across 2026 interim committees, but transcript verification for the candidate video could not be completed, so no clip was created rather than risk an unverified segment.
▲ AI Allies (sponsor enabling / pro-innovation bills)
No clearly identified AI allies on the record.
▼ AI Skeptics (sponsor restrictive bills)
No clearly identified AI skeptics on the record.
Bills · click any to expand its AI summary
No current-session AI bills indexed for Nevada.
↑ Back to top

Methodology & sources

The AI-Friendliness Index (0–100) is a composite editorial score where higher = more innovation-permissive / lower binding-mandate burden, weighing the ratio of enabling vs. restrictive bills, whether comprehensive AI-Act-style regulation is advancing/enacted, the scope of mandates (government-use is friendlier than broad private-sector duties), and enforcement intensity. The per-state score breakdown decomposes this into illustrative factors derived from the tracked bills. Bills are tagged Support / Oppose / Monitor from a general AI-industry vantage point. AI Allies / AI Skeptics are derived strictly from each bill's verified sponsor and stance — a legislator or committee sponsoring an enabling/pro-innovation measure is listed as an Ally, one sponsoring a restrictive mandate as a Skeptic — and every name was checked against USLege's official sponsor/author records. Where a state's bills are all restrictive (or all enabling), one column is intentionally empty. Bill AI summaries are USLege's generated analyses. Montana and Nevada have no current-session AI bills indexed (biennial legislatures).

Clips are real hearing moments, titled and watermarked with the USLege logo, opening at the cited timestamp via a shareable link. Some states (e.g., AK, CO, CT, FL, KY, OH, SD) restrict legislative video under copyright/state law, so clips could not be generated there; the source hearing is linked where available. Data pulled and verified June 18, 2026 — a point-in-time snapshot of fast-moving sessions.

Generated by USLege · June 18, 2026 · Live legislative & hearing-video intelligence across all 50 states
An AI Overview of the United States
Tracking AI legislation across all 50 states ✨