All Items
Legislation Only
Regulations and Documents
Legislation
About these categories

Social Impact: encompasses legislation that specifically addresses the impact of AI on society and individuals, including but not limited to; reducing the carbon footprint of AI systems, holding system developers accountable for the outputs of these systems, the establishment of new fairness and bias metrics to guard against AI-driven discrimination, the use of AI by minors, consumer protections for AI products, regulations that address psychological, physical, or material harm caused by interactions with AI systems, and the role of AI in misinformation, public discourse, and the erosion of trust in public institutions.

Data Governance: encompasses legislation that specifically addresses the secure and accurate collection and management of data within AI systems, including but not limited to; mandates for rectifying inaccuracies in AI data sets, mandates for ensuring AI data sets are free from biases, regulations that address intellectual property concerns with the unauthorized use of protected material in AI data sets, and requirements for data encryption, data anonymization, controlled access, and compliance with consumer privacy laws.

System Integrity: encompasses legislation that specifically addresses the inherent security, transparency, and control of AI systems, including but not limited to; mandates for human intervention and oversight in AI processes, standards for the interoperability of AI systems in essential services, and the implementation of security measures such as threat modeling, penetration testing, and incident response.

Robustness: encompasses legislation that specifically addresses the development and adoption of new benchmarks for AI performance, including but not limited to; the certification of AI systems against new benchmarks, ensuring compliance with international standards, requirements for auditing and transparent reporting to verify continuous regulatory compliance, and the creation of specialized oversight bodies.

About these sectors

Politics and Elections: encompasses legislation that specifically addresses the use and regulation of AI in political campaigns, electoral processes, and related legislative activities.

Government Agencies and Public Services: encompasses legislation that specifically addresses the use and regulation of AI by state and federal government agencies, as well as AI applications in the delivery of public services and enhancing government operations.

Judicial System: encompasses legislation that specifically addresses the use and regulation of AI by judicial and legal systems, including but not limited to the use of AI in case management and legal decision making.

Healthcare: encompasses legislation that specifically addresses the use and regulation of AI in healthcare settings, including but not limited to AI applications within hospitals and clinics, the development of AI-enabled diagnostic tools and related medical technologies, and the management of medical data.

Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment: encompasses legislation that specifically addresses the use and regulation of AI in business environments, ensuring fair competition, and the effects of AI on labor markets, employment practices, and corporate governance.

Academic and Research Institutions: encompasses legislation that specifically addresses the use and regulation of AI in educational and research contexts.

International Cooperation and Standards: encompasses laws and agreements that address international cooperation on AI development, use, and regulation, including but not limited to multinational standards, cross-border data practices, and global ethical guidelines for AI.

Nonprofits and NGOs: encompasses legislation that specifically addresses the use and regulation of AI by nonprofits and non-governmental organizations and institutions.

Hybrid, Emerging, and Unclassified: encompasses legislation that doesn't neatly fit into other categories, as well as the application of AI in hybrid or emerging sectors.

Clear All

4828 results:


California SB572: Vehicles: advanced driver assistance system: crash reports.

Description: An act to add Division 16.65 (commencing with Section 38800) to the Vehicle Code, relating to vehicles.
Summary: Senate Bill 572 mandates manufacturers of Level 2 advanced driver assistance system vehicles to report crash incidents to California's DMV within specified timelines, enhancing safety data transparency and compliance.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 20, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Lena Gonzalez (sole sponsor)
Last action: From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS. (March 26, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact
System Integrity (see reasoning)

The text primarily discusses consumer protection in the context of vehicles equipped with partial driving automation features. The relevance to AI comes from the references to 'partial driving automation features', which are commonly powered by AI algorithms. However, the discussion is more focused on consumer notices and liability issues rather than the broader societal impacts of AI, the management of data, integrity of AI systems, or robustness of benchmarks. For Social Impact, while consumer protection is essential, it’s limited in scope regarding AI's broader societal effects. For Data Governance, there's a mention of sharing information related to these features, but it does not delve into the core issues surrounding data management or accuracy. System Integrity is somewhat relevant as it deals with transparency in features, but it lacks a deep focus on security and oversight of AI systems. Robustness is not relevant as the text does not discuss performance benchmarks or compliance standards for AI systems. Overall, the relevance to the categories is minimal to moderate at best.


Sector:
Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment (see reasoning)

The text is primarily focused on regulations pertaining to passenger vehicles with automation features, which closely relates to the sector of Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment, as it affects manufacturers and dealers. The Consumer notice aspect connects with regulation and accountability for these entities. There is limited relevance to other sectors like Politics and Elections, Government Agencies and Public Services, or Judicial System, as the legislation does not appear to directly address those contexts. Healthcare, Academic and Research Institutions, International Cooperation and Standards, Nonprofits and NGOs, and Hybrid, Emerging, and Unclassified sectors are not connected to the focus of this legislation. Thus, the scoring reflects the primary impact on the business and consumer landscape regarding automotive technologies.


Keywords (occurrence): autonomous vehicle (1) show keywords in context

California AB887: Pupil instruction: high schools: computer science courses: implementation guide.

Description: An act to add Section 51220.8 to, and to add Chapter 19 (commencing with Section 53310) to Part 28 of Division 4 of Title 2 of, the Education Code, relating to pupil instruction.
Summary: Assembly Bill 887 mandates California high schools to offer computer science courses by 2027, aiming to improve access and diversity in the field, and requires annual public reviews of implementation plans.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 19, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Marc Berman (2 total sponsors)
Last action: Read first time. To print. (Feb. 19, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact
Data Governance
System Integrity (see reasoning)

The legislation outlined in the document addresses the implementation of computer science education in high schools, which has direct implications for Social Impact due to its focus on enhancing educational opportunities for underrepresented groups. It includes measures aimed at increasing enrollment in computer science courses among diverse populations, promoting inclusivity, and fostering equitable access to education. Data Governance is relevant as it establishes requirements for disaggregating and publicly reporting course enrollment data by gender, ethnicity, and socio-economic status, ensuring oversight and accountability in educational practices related to computer science. System Integrity is connected through mandates for the development of a computer science implementation guide, which would need to align with academic content standards, promoting transparency in teaching methods and content. Robustness, however, is less relevant as the focus is primarily on course offering and implementation rather than on performance benchmarks or regulatory compliance for AI technologies specifically. The emphasis on computer science, which includes AI principles, ties these categories together, particularly in enhancing societal equity through education and informing organizational efforts for better data management. Overall, Social Impact is the most relevant category, followed by Data Governance and System Integrity.


Sector:
Government Agencies and Public Services
Academic and Research Institutions (see reasoning)

The text primarily pertains to educational legislation and its implications within the education sector, focusing on computer science curriculum implementation in high schools. Its relevance to Politics and Elections is minimal as it does not address political processes. Government Agencies and Public Services are moderately relevant due to the involvement of the State Department of Education in implementing these educational standards. The Judicial System is not addressed at all. Healthcare is not part of the text's focus; thus, it rates a 1. Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment reflects a slight relevance as it discusses preparing students for future job markets in tech fields but is secondary to educational context. Academic and Research Institutions are very relevant as this legislation is fundamentally about improving educational policies and standards in K-12 settings. International Cooperation and Standards are less relevant and are rated a 1 as the document does not involve international policy. Nonprofits and NGOs are tangentially related, likely as stakeholders in educational equity, thus scoring a 2. Hybrid, Emerging, and Unclassified could apply to new intersections of education and tech but is scored a 2. Overall, the sectors most relevant are Education with a focus on school-based implementation.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (1)

California SB813: Multistakeholder regulatory organizations.

Description: An act to add Chapter 14 (commencing with Section 8898) to Division 1 of Title 2 of the Government Code, relating to artificial intelligence.
Summary: Senate Bill 813 establishes a framework for multistakeholder regulatory organizations to certify artificial intelligence systems, ensuring safety and compliance while promoting innovation and reducing legal liabilities in California.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 21, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Jerry McNerney (sole sponsor)
Last action: From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on B. P. & E.D. (March 26, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact
System Integrity (see reasoning)

The text discusses the establishment of multistakeholder regulatory organizations tasked with certifying AI models and applications. The portions that explicitly relate to AI include definitions of AI applications and models, the accountability of developers, and the need for standards in AI governance. This directly ties to social impacts through promoting responsible growth and ethical AI use, hence receiving a high relevance score in Social Impact. It also touches on System Integrity via the focus on safety, security, transparency, and oversight of AI systems but is less focused on robustness or data privacy per se, which diminishes those categories' relevance. Overall, the legislation centers on the governance of AI, indicating significant implications for societal trust and responsible innovation.


Sector:
Government Agencies and Public Services
Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment
Hybrid, Emerging, and Unclassified (see reasoning)

The text does not limit itself to one specific sector but applies broadly across multiple fields relevant to AI. However, it particularly pertains to Government Agencies and Public Services due to its focus on state oversight and regulatory processes. It indirectly touches upon Private Enterprises due to the implications for developers in the AI field. Nevertheless, it may not necessarily imply a direct legislative impact on Healthcare, Judicial Systems, or Academic Institutions specifically.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (49) automated (1) show keywords in context

Texas HB1709: Relating to the regulation and reporting on the use of artificial intelligence systems by certain business entities and state agencies; providing civil penalties.

Description: Relating to the regulation and reporting on the use of artificial intelligence systems by certain business entities and state agencies; providing civil penalties.
Summary: The Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act establishes regulations and reporting requirements for high-risk artificial intelligence systems used by businesses and state agencies, aiming to prevent algorithmic discrimination and ensure consumer protection.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Dec. 23, 2024
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Giovanni Capriglione (sole sponsor)
Last action: Filed (Dec. 23, 2024)

Category:
Societal Impact
Data Governance
System Integrity
Data Robustness (see reasoning)

The text outlines a comprehensive regulatory framework for the use of artificial intelligence systems by business entities and state agencies. It explicitly discusses issues like algorithmic discrimination, which is crucial to the social impact of AI, as it recognizes the potential for AI systems to cause unlawful discrimination against protected classifications. The text also mandates developers and deployers to conduct risk assessments related to algorithmic discrimination, further cementing its relevance to social impact. For data governance, there are requirements for developers to maintain records of generative AI training data and ensure that data sources are free from bias, addressing both the ethical use of data in AI systems and protection against discrimination. The sections on developer and deployer duties encompassing risk management and compliance also support the notion of system integrity and robustness, emphasizing the need for safeguards across AI systems to mitigate risks and improve transparency and accountability. However, it primarily focuses on the impacts and responsibilities related to AI systems rather than deep technical benchmarks or performance metrics, which are more central to the robustness category. Hence, while all categories feature relevance, the strongest connections are seen in social impact, data governance, and system integrity.


Sector:
Politics and Elections
Government Agencies and Public Services
Judicial system
Healthcare
Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment (see reasoning)

The bill directly addresses the use and regulation of AI by business entities and state agencies. It mandates actions and assessments by developers, deployers, and distributors of high-risk AI systems, targeting their responsibilities in sectors potentially affected by AI applications (like employment, healthcare, and governmental services). The focus on algorithmic discrimination ties directly to areas of employment and consumer services, making it particularly relevant in the private enterprises and government sectors. It also addresses potential impacts on voting processes, linking it to the political sector. However, while it includes provisions relevant to healthcare and public services, these areas are not as prominently emphasized in the legislation. Thus, the most immediate relevance pertains to private enterprises and government services over others, with legislative impact extending to judicial considerations in AI's use.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (164) machine learning (3) automated (2) deepfake (1) show keywords in context

Massachusetts H1873: Preventing a dystopian work environment

Description: Relative to preventing dystopian work environments. Labor and Workforce Development.
Summary: The bill aims to prevent dystopian work environments in Massachusetts by regulating the collection and use of worker data, ensuring transparency, data accuracy, and worker rights regarding their information in the workplace.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 16, 2023
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Dylan Fernandes (sole sponsor)
Last action: Senate concurred (July 30, 2024)

Category:
Societal Impact
Data Governance
System Integrity (see reasoning)

The legislation explicitly mentions Automated Decision Systems (ADS) and their relation to employment-related decisions, which ties into the social impact of AI by addressing concerns about bias, fairness, and privacy. This legislation seeks to prevent dystopian work environments that may arise due to the misuse of AI and algorithmic processes, indicating a strong focus on the potential adverse impacts on workers. Regarding Data Governance, the text details the processes surrounding data collection, rights to access and correct worker data, and accuracy mandates, all directly linked to responsible data management in the context of AI applications. System Integrity is relevant due to the legislation's implications for ensuring transparency and control over the data and algorithmic decision-making processes, thus promoting a secure working environment. Although there are mentions of data security and compliance, the emphasis on AI's societal implications makes Robustness less relevant in this context since it doesn't focus specifically on performance benchmarks for AI systems.


Sector:
Government Agencies and Public Services
Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment
Academic and Research Institutions (see reasoning)

The legislation pertains significantly to the sector of Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment as it directly addresses the use of AI in employment-related decisions and workplace environments, highlighting the implications of automation within labor contexts. It also relates to Government Agencies and Public Services since it involves regulatory oversight and establishes rights and responsibilities touching on data practices within workplace environments. Although the text does not explicitly mention academic institutions, the broader implications on workforce development may also touch upon training and accountability, aligning mildly with Academic and Research Institutions. The legislation does not specifically address the healthcare system, political campaigning, or the judicial system, which reduces relevance for those sectors. Overall, the legislation predominantly targets the labor sector with implications for data privacy and compliance in workplace settings.


Keywords (occurrence): machine learning (1) automated (11) algorithm (2) show keywords in context

Georgia HB715: Fair and Future Ready Housing Act; enact

Description: A BILL to be entitled an Act to amend Article 4 of Chapter 3 of Title 8 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to fair housing, so as to provide for artificial intelligence or automated decision tools in actions for discriminatory housing practices; to prohibit the use of certain defenses in actions for discriminatory housing practices; to prohibit the use of artificial intelligence or automated decision tools without human oversight in making certain housing determinations; to p...
Summary: The Fair and Future Ready Housing Act prohibits discriminatory housing practices involving artificial intelligence, ensuring human oversight in housing decisions and mandating disclosures of AI usage, with enforcement by the Attorney General.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: March 3, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Bryce Berry (5 total sponsors)
Last action: House Hopper (March 3, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact (see reasoning)

The text outlines the use of artificial intelligence (AI) and automated decision tools specifically in the context of housing practices, particularly focusing on preventing discriminatory practices. The emphasis on human oversight and the requirement for disclosures when using AI indicate a strong regulatory stance on social impacts. This legislation directly addresses the ethical implications of AI in housing, making it highly relevant to the 'Social Impact' category. It also touches upon principles of accountability and fairness, which are essential elements of social governance. The text does not specifically address data governance, system integrity, or robustness in any substantial way, as it focuses primarily on the implications of AI use in discriminatory practices, thus minimizing the relevance of those categories.


Sector:
Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment (see reasoning)

The text primarily deals with the application of AI in the context of housing and makes direct references to prohibiting its use without human oversight, making it a regulatory measure targeting the real estate sector. This positions it directly within the realms of real estate and housing, linked closely to issues of discrimination and fairness in service provision. However, while it references legal accountability, it does not specifically pertain to legislation directed at political campaigns, government agencies, the judicial system, healthcare, private enterprises, academic institutions, or international cooperation in a defined manner. Thus, the most relevant sector is the housing sector, with limited relevance to others. No references were made to any sectors other than housing and potential implications for governmental oversight.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (6) automated (8) show keywords in context

California SB468: High-risk artificial intelligence systems: duty to protect personal information.

Description: An act to add Title 1.81.28 (commencing with Section 1798.91.2) to Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, relating to artificial intelligence.
Summary: Senate Bill No. 468 mandates that businesses deploying high-risk artificial intelligence systems protect personal information by implementing comprehensive security programs, enhancing consumer privacy rights in California.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 19, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Josh Becker (sole sponsor)
Last action: Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print. (Feb. 19, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact
Data Governance
System Integrity (see reasoning)

The text specifically addresses the duties and responsibilities of businesses that deploy high-risk artificial intelligence systems, particularly in the context of protecting personal information. This relevance to AI is clear in the requirement for businesses to implement comprehensive information security programs that safeguard data processed by AI systems. Furthermore, the bill emphasizes the implications of failing to protect this information, categorizing violations as deceptive trade practices. Given this direct focus, several categories are relevant, especially regarding the protection of individual rights and data privacy in the use and management of AI systems.


Sector:
Government Agencies and Public Services
Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment (see reasoning)

The legislation primarily targets businesses deploying high-risk AI systems and the protection of personal information, which could be relevant across several sectors. However, the strongest relevance lies with sectors involving consumer data and protections. The act does not specifically address AI in political processes, healthcare, or judicial systems. The focus on privacy rights and security management in the business and government applications of AI highlights the act's connections to sectors like Government Agencies and Public Services and Private Enterprises. Therefore, the highest scores will correspond to those categories.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (14) automated (1) show keywords in context

Florida H1213: K-12 School Route Optimization Pilot Program

Description: Creates K-12 school route optimization pilot program in specified county school districts; provides program requirements; provides reporting requirements; requires DOE to assist school districts with implementation of pilot program; provides for expiration of program.
Summary: The bill establishes a K-12 school route optimization pilot program in select Florida counties to enhance student transportation efficiency and safety using AI and evaluate its financial impacts.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 26, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Education Administration Subcommittee (3 total sponsors)
Last action: 1st Reading (Committee Substitute 1) (March 28, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact
Data Governance
System Integrity (see reasoning)

The K-12 School Transportation bill explicitly mandates the use of artificial intelligence programs for optimizing transportation routes for students. This requirement relates directly to the development and implementation of AI within the educational context, enhancing the safety, efficiency, and effectiveness of school transportation. Given this focus on AI and the need for accountability and regulation in how it is employed in public services for K-12 education, this text bears significant relevance to the Social Impact and Government Agencies and Public Services categories, as it directly addresses how AI affects student safety and transportation policies. It also links to the System Integrity category due to the focus on ensuring compliance regarding AI use and penalties for non-compliance, which speaks to transparency and accountability within the systems involved in K-12 transportation. The emphasis on AI in school transportation additionally introduces considerations related to data governance as it pertains to student safety and efficiency, making the Data Governance category moderately relevant but not as prominent as the others. Lastly, the Robustness category is less relevant as the bill primarily focuses on operational implementation rather than benchmarking or auditing AI performance itself.


Sector:
Government Agencies and Public Services (see reasoning)

This bill has clear implications for the Government Agencies and Public Services sector since it outlines how public school districts must utilize AI in their transportation operations. It directly addresses the responsibilities of these governmental entities in implementing new technologies aimed at improving public service delivery, thereby enhancing educational outcomes and student safety. The legislation does not specifically pertain to the other sectors such as Politics and Elections, Judicial System, Healthcare, Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment, Academic and Research Institutions, International Cooperation and Standards, Nonprofits and NGOs, or the Hybrid, Emerging, and Unclassified sectors, making those categories irrelevant for this text. The primary focus on governmental provision of services makes this legislation particularly relevant to the Government Agencies and Public Services sector.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (2) show keywords in context

Washington SB5105: Revised for 1st Substitute: Concerning sexually explicit depictions of minors.

Description: Revised for 1st Substitute: Concerning sexually explicit depictions of minors.
Summary: The bill addresses the creation and distribution of sexually explicit depictions of minors, specifically targeting artificial intelligence-generated images. It aims to strengthen laws against such materials and impose penalties to prevent child exploitation.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 5, 2025
Status: Engrossed
Primary sponsor: Tina Orwall (7 total sponsors)
Last action: Scheduled for public hearing in the House Committee on Community Safety at 1:30 PM (March 17, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact
Data Governance
System Integrity (see reasoning)

The text primarily addresses the challenge posed by advancements in AI technologies in relation to the creation and alteration of fabricated depictions of minors engaging in sexually explicit conduct. These concerns align closely with the categories presented. For Social Impact, the text is very relevant as it discusses the potential harm to minors and societal implications of AI-generated explicit materials. In terms of Data Governance, the text mentions issues related to the management of data that might include illicit materials, but does not focus on data collection and management practices sufficiently to warrant a high score. System Integrity is pertinent due to the need for human oversight in detecting AI-generated content, but again the focus on security measures appears secondary. Robustness is less relevant as it is not primarily about performance benchmarks for AI systems but rather focuses on legislative regulation rather than compliance standards. Thus, Social Impact gets a very high score while Data Governance, System Integrity, and Robustness have less direct relevance.


Sector:
Government Agencies and Public Services
Judicial system
Nonprofits and NGOs (see reasoning)

The text has strong implications for several sectors. Particularly, it affects Government Agencies and Public Services, as law enforcement agencies will utilize AI detection methods to combat crimes involving fabricated child depictions. The Judicial System is impacted as it addresses legal definitions and penalties surrounding such crimes. Nonprofits and NGOs, particularly those focused on child protection, will also find this legislation relevant as it may inform their advocacy and prevention programs. Although the text does not principally focus on the academic or healthcare sectors, some AI applications in those areas may intersect with the issues raised regarding exploitation and the use of AI in generating content. Thus, Government Agencies and Public Services and the Judicial System receive high relevance scores, while Nonprofits and NGOs also see a moderate connection. Other sectors like Politics and Elections, Private Enterprises, Academic and Research Institutions, and International Cooperation receive low relevance due to lack of direct mention or implication.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (6) automated (1) show keywords in context

Rhode Island S0627: Establishes regulations to ensure the ethical development, integration, and deployment of high-risk AI systems, particularly those influencing consequential decisions.

Description: COMMERCIAL LAW -- GENERAL REGULATORY PROVISIONS -- ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ACT - Establishes regulations to ensure the ethical development, integration, and deployment of high-risk AI systems, particularly those influencing consequential decisions.
Summary: The bill establishes regulations for the ethical development, integration, and deployment of high-risk AI systems, focusing on preventing algorithmic discrimination in consequential decisions affecting consumers.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: March 7, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Louis Dipalma (7 total sponsors)
Last action: Introduced, referred to Senate Artificial Intelligence & Emerging Technol (March 7, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact
Data Governance
System Integrity
Data Robustness (see reasoning)

The text heavily emphasizes regulating high-risk AI systems and mitigating algorithmic discrimination, indicating a strong societal impact. It addresses fairness and bias, thereby falling under Social Impact. Data Governance is also prominently featured, focusing on managing data used in AI systems, including transparency measures for consumers. System Integrity is relevant as it discusses the importance of human oversight and responsible deployment actions by developers and integrators. Robustness is present to an extent through advocating for performance measures and assessments of high-risk AI systems, although it is less emphasized compared to the other three categories. Overall, the text strongly integrates AI concerns into societal, governance, and systemic contexts.


Sector:
Government Agencies and Public Services
Judicial system
Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment (see reasoning)

The text predominantly affects the sectors involving Government Agencies and Public Services due to its regulatory nature, which directly informs how the government will oversee AI implementations. It may also touch upon Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment relating to employment discrimination due to its focus on consequential decisions in hiring practices. The Judicial System can be slightly implicated due to the mention of legal repercussions tied to AI outputs affecting consumers. However, it remains primarily grounded in an overarching governmental context with regards to AI oversight.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (154) automated (2) algorithm (2) show keywords in context

Arkansas HB1958: To Require Public Entities To Create A Policy Concerning The Authorized Use Of Artificial Intelligence.

Description: To Require Public Entities To Create A Policy Concerning The Authorized Use Of Artificial Intelligence.
Summary: The bill mandates public entities in Arkansas to establish policies for the authorized use of artificial intelligence and automated decision tools, ensuring human oversight in decision-making and cybersecurity compliance.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: April 1, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Stephen Meeks (sole sponsor)
Last action: Read the first time, rules suspended, read the second time and referred to the Committee on ADVANCED COMMUNICATIONS AND INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY - HOUSE (April 1, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (10) automated (11) show keywords in context

Arizona SB1370: Civil penalties; commercial motor vehicles

Description: Civil penalties; commercial motor vehicles
Summary: Senate Bill 1370 amends various statutes regarding commercial motor vehicles in Arizona, focusing on establishing and clarifying civil penalties related to their regulation and operation.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 26, 2025
Status: Engrossed
Primary sponsor: Kevin Payne (sole sponsor)
Last action: House Committee of the Whole action: Do Pass Amended (March 27, 2025)

Category: None (see reasoning)

The text primarily focuses on legislation concerning civil penalties for commercial motor vehicles in Arizona. While it introduces the concept of automated driving systems and autonomous vehicles, these references are relatively limited. The main focus seems to be on standard vehicle definitions and regulations rather than an explicit examination of AI's social impact, data governance, system integrity, or robustness as related to AI technology. Thus, overall relevance to the categories is low.


Sector: None (see reasoning)

The text does not directly address AI’s application or regulation in specific sectors mentioned. However, it does mention the automated driving system and autonomous vehicles, which could relate loosely to both government agencies and public services (given that regulations on autonomous vehicles could affect public safety and transport). Nevertheless, the primary focus is on definitions and penalties rather than sector-specific impacts or regulations involving AI. Thus, relevance remains low overall.


Keywords (occurrence): automated (8) autonomous vehicle (3) show keywords in context

Florida S1444: Criminal Justice

Description: Prohibiting the use of motor vehicle kill switches; providing exceptions; providing a minimum mandatory sentence for attempted murder of specified justice system personnel; providing correctional probation officers with the same firearms rights as law enforcement officers; prohibiting a person from depriving certain officers of digital recording devices or restraint devices, etc.
Summary: The bill prohibits the use of motor vehicle kill switches, establishes penalties for related offenses, enhances protections for law enforcement personnel, and sets requirements for testing infectious diseases in arrestees.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 26, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Criminal Justice (2 total sponsors)
Last action: CS by Criminal Justice read 1st time (April 3, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (4) automated (2) show keywords in context

:

Description:
Summary:
Collection:
Status date:
Status:
Primary sponsor: ( total sponsors)
Source:
Last action: ()

Category: None (see reasoning)


Sector: None (see reasoning)


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence () machine learning () neural network () deep learning () automated () deepfake () synthetic media () large language model () foundation model () chatbot () recommendation system () algorithm () autonomous vehicle ()

:

Description:
Summary:
Collection:
Status date:
Status:
Primary sponsor: ( total sponsors)
Source:
Last action: ()

Category: None (see reasoning)


Sector: None (see reasoning)


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence () machine learning () neural network () deep learning () automated () deepfake () synthetic media () large language model () foundation model () chatbot () recommendation system () algorithm () autonomous vehicle ()

:

Description:
Summary:
Collection:
Status date:
Status:
Primary sponsor: ( total sponsors)
Source:
Last action: ()

Category: None (see reasoning)


Sector: None (see reasoning)


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence () machine learning () neural network () deep learning () automated () deepfake () synthetic media () large language model () foundation model () chatbot () recommendation system () algorithm () autonomous vehicle ()

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES

Summary: The bill enhances U.S. Customs and Border Protection by increasing officer numbers and reporting requirements, along with improving disaster relief definitions and procurement processes for artificial intelligence.
Collection: Congressional Record
Status date: Dec. 16, 2024
Status: Issued
Source: Congress

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (1) show keywords in context

New Mexico HB2: General Appropriation Act Of 2025

Description: General Appropriation Act Of 2025
Summary: The General Appropriation Act of 2025 allocates state funds for various agencies in New Mexico, authorizing expenditures necessary for fiscal year 2026 to ensure efficient government operations and services.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: April 11, 2025
Status: Passed
Primary sponsor: Meredith Dixon (2 total sponsors)
Last action: Signed by Governor - Chapter 160 - Apr. 11 (April 11, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (1) machine learning (1) automated (2) show keywords in context

Outbound Investment Transparency (Executive Session)

Summary: The Outbound Investment Transparency bill aims to address and regulate American investments in Chinese companies, emphasizing the need for transparency to prevent funding China's military advancements and economic threats.
Collection: Congressional Record
Status date: Dec. 16, 2024
Status: Issued
Source: Congress

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (1) show keywords in context

West Virginia HCR99: Resolution to study policies aimed at preventing financial fraud and scams

Description: Resolution to study policies aimed at preventing financial fraud and scams
Summary: The bill requests a study by West Virginia's Judiciary Committee to develop recommendations for combating financial fraud and scams, aiming to enhance consumer protection and improve existing laws.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: April 9, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: David Kelly (46 total sponsors)
Last action: To House Rules (April 9, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (1) show keywords in context
Feedback form