This browser is not actively supported anymore. For the best passle experience, we strongly recommend you upgrade your browser.

Our Take on AI

| 2 minutes read

Tracking US State AI Governance Legislation

New Resource Tracks US State AI Governance Legislation 

The International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP) has recently released a new resource that collates and analyzes legislative activity related to artificial intelligence (AI) governance at the US state level.  The IAPP US State AI Governance Legislation Tracker aims to help privacy professionals and other stakeholders keep track of the rapidly changing landscape of AI regulation and best practices across different domains and contexts. 

 Scope and Methodology of the Tracker 

The tracker focuses on legislative efforts that directly apply to private sector organizations, excluding government-only bills and laws, as well as bills that propose the establishment of state AI task forces or advisory councils.  The tracker also excludes sectoral bills and laws that are limited to specific areas, such as employment or health care, and instead covers laws that are broadly applicable to some types of AI systems.   Thus far, only Colorado and Utah have enacted state legislation for AI.  Other states, such as California and New York, have active bills in process. 

 The tracker categorizes the covered systems by their scope, such as generative AI, automated decision-making systems, or high-risk AI systems, and reflects the diversity of definitions used by different states.  The tracker also sorts the obligations imposed by the state laws into broad themes, such as documentation, notice, explanation, appeal, or discrimination, and indicates whether they apply to developers or deployers of AI systems. The tracker provides a general comparison tool, but also encourages users to read the laws themselves to understand their implications. 

 Trends and Challenges of State AI Governance 

The tracker reveals some of the trends and challenges of state AI governance in the US. One of the most common types of AI legislation in 2024 has been bills focused on generative AI or synthetic content, requiring labeling or disclosure of the use of such systems or their work products.  Another common theme has been the requirement of notice or notification to individuals or regulators about the use of AI systems, especially those that make consequential decisions or pose risks of discrimination. 

 However, the tracker also shows the difficulty of crafting comprehensive and consistent AI governance legislation that covers cross-sectoral uses of AI systems, while ensuring appropriate safeguards and accountability for different risks and contexts. The legislative text varies widely among proposals, and the obligations may differ in their depth, scope, and applicability. Moreover, some of the obligations, such as explanation, appeal, or third-party review, may pose technical or practical challenges for implementation or enforcement. 

 Looking Ahead to 2025 

The tracker represents a snapshot of the first major wave of legislative activity on AI governance in the US. Some states have come close to passing impactful AI governance requirements, while others have initiated studies or commissions to generate more information and recommendations. The landscape of state AI governance regulation will continue to evolve in the coming months and years.  See the link below for more information and access to the State Tracker.

Unlike with more established policy topics, such as consumer privacy, AI presents a wide range of challenges ranging across many domains with implications for seemingly every corner of existing legal practice.


ai, statelegislation