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

5046 results:


Florida S1740: Insurance

Description: Specifying that hurricane mitigation grants funded through the My Safe Florida Home Program may be awarded only under certain circumstances; revising the surplus required for certain insurers applying for their original certificates of authority and to maintain their certificates of authority, respectively; specifying prohibitions for persons who were officers or directors of an insolvent insurer, attorneys in fact of a reciprocal insurer, or officers or directors of an attorney in fact of a ...
Summary: The bill amends Florida insurance laws, focusing on improving hurricane mitigation through grants for inspections and enhancements to homes, and establishing regulations around insurers’ claims processes and officer qualifications.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 28, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Banking and Insurance (3 total sponsors)
Last action: CS by Banking and Insurance read 1st time (March 19, 2025)

Category:
System Integrity (see reasoning)

This text primarily discusses insurance regulations, particularly hurricane mitigation grants and insurer requirements. The mention of 'artificial intelligence, machine learning systems, or algorithms' while stating they cannot be the sole basis for claim denials indicates an intersection with AI considerations. However, the document mainly focuses on insurance processes and does not delve into broader societal impacts or specific data governance concerns related to AI utilization. Therefore, its relevance to the categories of Social Impact, Data Governance, System Integrity, and Robustness primarily ties back to the context of insurance and decision-making rather than direct implications on societal norms or technical integrity in AI systems.


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

The text is significantly relevant to the insurance sector due to its focus on hurricane mitigation insurance, claims processing, and handling grant applications. It outlines the eligibility requirements and stipulations related to homeowners and insurance practices. While it does mention AI and algorithms, the primary context is within the insurance domain rather than how AI operates or affects different sectors. It does, however, subtly touch upon the principles of fairness and accountability in claims decisions, which might indicate broader implications for regulation in the sector. Therefore, its most related sector is Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment, but it also has elements relevant to Government Agencies and Public Services due to the involvement of state regulation.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (6) machine learning (6) algorithm (7) 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 regulating the use of artificial intelligence and automated decision tools, ensuring human oversight and cybersecurity compliance.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: April 17, 2025
Status: Passed
Primary sponsor: Stephen Meeks (2 total sponsors)
Last action: Notification that HB1958 is now Act 847 (April 17, 2025)

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

Tennessee HB2091: AN ACT to amend Tennessee Code Annotated, Title 39, Chapter 14, Part 1 and Title 47, relative to the protection of personal rights.

Description: As enacted, defines and adds "voice" as a protected personal right; adds commercial availability of a sound recording or audiovisual work in which the individual's name, voice, likeness, or image is readily identifiable to considerations for determining whether non-use has occurred; makes other related changes. - Amends TCA Title 39, Chapter 14, Part 1 and Title 47.
Summary: The bill amends Tennessee law to enhance protection of individuals’ rights regarding their name, likeness, and voice, ensuring unauthorized commercial use requires consent, effective July 1, 2024.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: March 26, 2024
Status: Passed
Primary sponsor: William Lamberth (44 total sponsors)
Last action: Effective date(s) 07/01/2024 (March 26, 2024)

Category:
System Integrity (see reasoning)

This legislation primarily focuses on the protection of personal rights, particularly as it relates to individuals' names, voices, and likenesses. Since there is mention of algorithms, software, and technology that can produce identifiable outputs (photographs, voices, likenesses), it may touch on areas related to data management and automated decisions. However, the emphasis remains largely on personal rights rather than broader social impacts directly linked to AI technologies or their governance. Therefore, while there is some relevance in terms of 'System Integrity' due to the mention of algorithms, the direct implications are limited. There's also limited reference regarding environmental impact, fairness in AI outputs, or complex issues of misinformation and public trust, leading to a lower score in 'Social Impact' but still acknowledging some degree of relevance for potential bias or misuse. Other categories do not have explicit connections; notably, 'Data Governance' would need clear mandates on data handling, which this text does not provide.


Sector: None (see reasoning)

The bill primarily addresses personal rights protection and does not inherently apply to the governance of AI in sectors like politics, public services, or healthcare. The references to technology and algorithms have more to do with the use of personal identifiers than with systemic applications of AI within these sectors. Thus, although there is a tangential connection, particularly with regard to 'Government Agencies and Public Services' in terms of regulated use of technology, it does not explicitly fit into any assigned sector category directly.


Keywords (occurrence): algorithm (2) show keywords in context

Nevada SB382: Revises provisions relating to vehicles. (BDR 43-316)

Description: AN ACT relating to vehicles; authorizing certain trailers used for farm purposes to be registered for a 5-year period in lieu of a 12-month period; requiring a person who elects to register such a trailer for a 5-year period to pay fees commensurate with the 5-year period; authorizing autonomous vehicles to be equipped with certain marker lamps which indicate that an automated driving system is operating the autonomous vehicle; and providing other matters properly relating thereto.
Summary: Senate Bill 382 allows farm trailers to be registered for five years instead of one, mandates associated fees, and permits autonomous vehicles to have indicator lamps for automated driving status.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 4, 2025
Status: Other
Primary sponsor: Ira Hansen (sole sponsor)
Last action: (No further action taken.) (June 4, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact (see reasoning)

The bill revolves primarily around the registration of vehicles and specifically mentions the regulation of autonomous vehicles, indicating the use of automated driving systems. This connection suggests a focus on technological implications. However, the predominantly regulatory nature concerning vehicle registration and the limited mention of AI technologies means the relevance varies across the categories. The Social Impact category is moderately relevant due to potential implications of autonomous vehicle usage on societal norms. Data Governance does not apply significantly as the text mainly addresses registration without delving into data collection or management. System Integrity is slightly relevant due to the mention of safety features like marker lamps, but lacks depth on security or oversight mandates. Robustness is not relevant here as the text does not include benchmarks or performance standards for AI systems.


Sector:
Government Agencies and Public Services (see reasoning)

Considering the autonomous vehicle provisions, the category that seems to fit best is 'Government Agencies and Public Services' as it deals with the use of autonomous systems in public transport and vehicle oversight. There is a relatively low connection to 'Politics and Elections,' 'Judicial System,' and 'Healthcare,' as none pertain directly to the discussion of autonomous vehicle legislation in a broad or significant manner. 'Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment' may imply concerns regarding employment in relation to automation but is not explicitly addressed. 'Academic and Research Institutions' could have some relevance if the text were to propose studies on the impact of such technologies but is lacking in present content. Overall, the relevant sectors focus on government oversight and the societal integration of autonomous vehicle technology.


Keywords (occurrence): automated (12) autonomous vehicle (25) show keywords in context

Georgia SB249: "Quality Basic Education Act,"; beginning in the 2031-2032 school year, a computer science course shall be a high school graduation requirement; provide

Description: A BILL to be entitled an Act to amend Part 2 of Article 6 of Chapter 2 of Title 20 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to competencies and core curriculum under the "Quality Basic Education Act," so as to provide that, beginning in the 2031-2032 school year, a computer science course shall be a high school graduation requirement; to provide for certain computer science courses to be substituted for units of credit graduation requirements in certain other subject areas; to prov...
Summary: The "Quality Basic Education Act" mandates that starting in the 2031-2032 school year, a computer science course becomes a high school graduation requirement in Georgia, addressing critical education needs.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 24, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Clint Dixon (6 total sponsors)
Last action: Senate Hopper (Feb. 24, 2025)

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

The text outlines a legislative bill aimed at incorporating computer science education, including artificial intelligence concepts, into high school curricula. This directly relates to the Social Impact category as it seeks to enhance educational competencies and addresses the skills needed for the future workforce, potentially affecting the societal structure and preparing students for modern technological environments. The Data Governance category has moderate relevance as the bill implicitly suggests careful management of educational content, but does not explicitly address data privacy or accuracy issues. System Integrity is relevant as it mentions standards for education, though in a limited sense, while Robustness has lesser relevance since the focus is on curriculum rather than benchmarks for AI system performance.


Sector:
Academic and Research Institutions (see reasoning)

The bill pertains most closely to the Academic and Research Institutions sector, as it deals with the education system and introduces computer science as a graduation requirement, thus directly affecting curriculum design. It is less relevant to sectors such as Government Agencies and Public Services since it is focused more on educational institutions rather than public service delivery or regulatory frameworks. The Healthcare, Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment sectors are not directly affected as the bill does not deal with healthcare provisions or labor markets explicitly. Similarly, sectors like Nonprofits and NGOs or the Judicial System do not find a direct application in this legislative text, leading to scores of 2 or lower for those categories.


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

Ohio HB96: Make state operating appropriations for FY 2026-27

Description: To amend sections 3.15, 9.03, 9.07, 9.239, 9.24, 9.27, 9.28, 9.312, 9.331, 9.334, 9.35, 9.67, 9.681, 9.821, 101.30, 101.352, 101.53, 101.63, 101.65, 101.82, 101.83, 101.84, 102.02, 103.05, 103.051, 103.13, 103.65, 106.02, 106.021, 106.023, 106.024, 106.031, 107.03, 107.032, 107.033, 107.12, 109.02, 109.71, 109.73, 109.77, 109.803, 111.15, 111.27, 113.05, 113.13, 113.40, 113.51, 113.53, 113.78, 117.11, 117.38, 117.44, 117.56, 119.03, 119.04, 120.06, 120.08, 121.02, 121.03, 121.085, 121.22, 121...
Summary: The bill appropriates state operating funds for the fiscal year 2026-27 and amends various sections of Ohio law, ensuring budget allocations are aligned with state needs.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 11, 2025
Status: Enrolled
Primary sponsor: Brian Stewart (8 total sponsors)
Last action: Sent To The Governor (June 27, 2025)

Category: None (see reasoning)

The text does not contain any explicit mentions of AI technologies or related keyword terms. It largely encompasses a series of legislative amendments and appropriations relating to state operations. As such, it lacks relevance to any discussions surrounding AI impacts on society, data governance practices, system integrity, or robustness of AI technologies.


Sector: None (see reasoning)

Similarly, the text does not indicate any sector-specific applications or legislation addressing the use of AI in areas such as politics, public services, healthcare, or any of the other defined sectors. As it primarily focuses on appropriations and administrative amendments, it does not provide insights or directives that pertain to AI use in public, legal, or private sector contexts.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (12) automated (46) show keywords in context

Florida S7026: Information Technology

Description: Creating the Agency for State Systems and Enterprise Technology (ASSET); requiring that the Division of Elections comprehensive risk assessment comply with the risk assessment methodology developed by ASSET; requiring agencies and the judicial branch to include a cumulative inventory and a certain status report of specified projects with their legislative budget requests; revising the powers, duties, and functions of the Department of Management Services, through the Florida Digital Service; ...
Summary: The bill establishes the Agency for State Systems and Enterprise Technology (ASSET) in Florida, outlining its governance, roles, and responsibilities in managing state information technology and cybersecurity initiatives.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: March 24, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Appropriations (sole sponsor)
Last action: Placed on Calendar, on 2nd reading (March 24, 2025)

Category:
Data Governance
System Integrity (see reasoning)

The text primarily discusses the establishment of the Agency for State Systems and Enterprise Technology (ASSET) and outlines its powers, duties, and responsibilities, particularly regarding information technology within the state. The focus is on governance, risk assessment, and technology management. While AI is not explicitly mentioned, the legislation involves overarching technology frameworks that may inherently incorporate AI systems, especially given ASSET's role in overseeing information technology initiatives. However, as AI-specific discussions or applications are not detailed in the text, relevance to the categories remains limited.


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

The text is centered on the establishment and governance of the Agency for State Systems and Enterprise Technology. There are implications for various sectors, notably Government Agencies and Public Services, as it outlines responsibilities relevant to state IT governance and operations. The focus on risk assessments and compliance with standards also connects with cybersecurity aspects pertinent to the judicial system, yet the specificity of AI applications in these contexts isn't clearly elaborated. Thus, strong connections can be made mostly with the Government Agencies and Public Services sector, with moderate ties to others.


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

Minnesota SF2087: Use of tenant screening software that uses nonpublic competitor data to set rent prohibition

Description: Use of tenant screening software that uses nonpublic competitor data to set rent prohibition
Summary: The bill prohibits landlords from using tenant screening software that relies on nonpublic competitor data for setting rents and bans biased screening algorithms against protected classes. It aims to promote fair housing practices.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: March 3, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Erin Maye Quade (5 total sponsors)
Last action: Referred to Judiciary and Public Safety (March 3, 2025)

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

The bill addresses tenant screening software that uses algorithms and artificial intelligence, especially concerning biases against protected classes. It specifically prohibits using such software that has a disparate impact on vulnerable populations, indicating a clear connection to social implications of AI. The mention of algorithmic devices and definitions of artificial intelligence directly ties into concerns regarding bias, fairness, and discrimination stemming from AI applications. Thus, the relevance to Social Impact is extremely pertinent. While it includes aspects of data governance and system integrity due to the nature of data use and the need for oversight, these are less central to the bill's main provisions compared to its focus on societal consequences.


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

The bill primarily pertains to the housing sector, focusing on landlord practices and tenant screening. Therefore, it is most relevant to Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment, given its implications for landlords and their use of AI and algorithms in rental decisions. There is a moderate connection to Government Agencies and Public Services, as the enforcement of tenant rights and anti-discrimination measures may involve public agencies. However, it does not directly relate to political processes or healthcare, reducing relevance in those sectors significantly.


Keywords (occurrence): algorithm (2) show keywords in context

Massachusetts H1210: Relative to AI health communications and informed patient consent

Description: Relative to artificial intelligence health communications and informed patient consent. Financial Services.
Summary: The bill mandates transparency in AI-generated health communications, requiring patient consent and disclosures about AI use in healthcare and insurance claims, aiming to ensure informed patient rights and reduce bias.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 27, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Bradley Jones (4 total sponsors)
Last action: Senate concurred (Feb. 27, 2025)

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

The text heavily focuses on the use of artificial intelligence in healthcare communications and patient consent, directly influencing how AI may impact society (Social Impact) and necessitating careful data management practices (Data Governance). Moreover, it emphasizes accountability and transparency in the usage of AI algorithms within insurance claims processes, which ties into the integrity of AI systems (System Integrity). However, it does not specifically address performance benchmarks for AI (Robustness). Therefore, the relevance is strong in Social Impact, Data Governance, and System Integrity, while less relevant in Robustness.


Sector:
Government Agencies and Public Services
Healthcare (see reasoning)

The legislation explicitly relates to the use of AI in the healthcare sector, focusing on informed consent and the disclosure of AI tools in claims processing, making it extremely relevant to Healthcare. There is also a significant implication for Government Agencies and Public Services due to its regulatory nature in overseeing AI use in the healthcare system. However, it doesn't pertain to other sectors such as Politics and Elections, Judicial System, Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment, Academic and Research Institutions, International Cooperation and Standards, Nonprofits and NGOs, or Hybrid, Emerging, and Unclassified, resulting in lower relevance scores for those categories.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (3) automated (1) show keywords in context

Washington HB1833: Creating an artificial intelligence grant program.

Description: Creating an artificial intelligence grant program.
Summary: The bill establishes the Spark Act grant program in Washington to fund innovative artificial intelligence projects, promoting economic development, job creation, and addressing statewide challenges such as public safety and healthcare.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 4, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Michael Keaton (5 total sponsors)
Last action: Referred to Rules 2 Review. (Feb. 28, 2025)

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

The text explicitly addresses the creation of an artificial intelligence grant program, focusing on economic development through innovative AI applications. Discussions of assessing risks associated with AI, ethical uses of AI, and the prioritization of small businesses, all signal a concern for societal impacts that may emerge as AI becomes more integrated into industries. Therefore, the 'Social Impact' category is very relevant. The text also discusses grant supports that relate to using data to drive innovation, which aligns with some aspects of 'Data Governance,' although it primarily emphasizes economic development over data management. 'System Integrity' is relevant due to discussions surrounding ethical uses of AI, risk evaluation, and transparency requirements for the technologies in development. While 'Robustness' is less emphasized directly in the text, the overarching goal to build strong, effective AI systems touches on the need for benchmarks and standards. Therefore, it could be somewhat relevant but less so than the other categories.


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

The text primarily pertains to the economic development sector through the establishment of the artificial intelligence grant program, which directly supports innovation and job creation. Discussions about recruiting input from various stakeholders signal a comprehensive approach to fostering technological advancement, indicative of engagement across sectors such as government and private enterprises. As such, there is a strong connection to 'Government Agencies and Public Services' and 'Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment.' However, while healthcare applications are mentioned, the text does not specifically address healthcare legislation or policies, indicating a less direct relevance to that sector. The text involves many stakeholders and considerations, including civil rights and transparency, indicating a general relevance to sectors of 'Nonprofits and NGOs' aside from the focused sectors.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (26) machine learning (5) foundation model (1) show keywords in context

Minnesota SF2940: Minnesota Data Privacy Act modification to make consumer health data a form of sensitive data provision and sensitive data additional protections addition provision

Description: Minnesota Data Privacy Act modification to make consumer health data a form of sensitive data provision and sensitive data additional protections addition provision
Summary: The bill modifies the Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act to classify consumer health data as sensitive data, enhancing protections for such data within privacy regulations.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: March 24, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Bonnie Westlin (2 total sponsors)
Last action: Referred to Commerce and Consumer Protection (March 24, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact
Data Governance (see reasoning)

The text details modifications to the Minnesota Data Privacy Act, specifically addressing consumer health data and its classification as sensitive data. It emphasizes the additional protections for sensitive data, such as biometric and genetic information. The inclusion of 'algorithms' and 'machine learning' in connection with health data solidifies its relevance for data governance, particularly regarding how personal data is managed securely and without bias. While there is a significant emphasis on data governance, the text also indirectly relates to social impacts by discussing consumer protections and impacts on health-related data handling. However, system integrity and robustness are less directly addressed, as the text primarily revolves around consumer rights and data privacy rather than technical standards or performance benchmarks for AI systems.


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

The text is highly relevant to the Healthcare sector, as it primarily concerns consumer health data and its protections under modified privacy laws. It also touches on government operations by describing how the legislation affects the handling of data by entities operating in Minnesota, which could include both public and private organizations involved in healthcare. However, its focus on consumer protections means it is less applicable to sectors like Private Enterprises or Academic Institutions, as it primarily discusses regulatory compliance rather than sector-specific applications of AI. The inclusion of terms like 'algorithms' and 'profiling' links to broader implications on AI use in the healthcare space, enhancing its relevance to that sector.


Keywords (occurrence): automated (2) show keywords in context

Massachusetts H1931: To enhance protections against child exploitation and misuse of emerging technologies

Description: For legislation to enhance protections against child exploitation and misuse of emerging technologies. The Judiciary.
Summary: The bill seeks to strengthen Massachusetts laws against child exploitation and misuse of technology by increasing penalties, establishing a task force, and promoting victim support and public awareness initiatives.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 27, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Francisco Paulino (sole sponsor)
Last action: Senate concurred (Feb. 27, 2025)

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

The text discusses the misuse of emerging technologies, particularly in the context of child exploitation, which strongly relates to the category of Social Impact due to its focus on protecting children and addressing harms caused by AI technologies like deepfakes and computer-generated content. The legislation proposes strict penalties for the production and distribution of such content, highlighting the societal impact of AI misuse. Data Governance is also relevant as the text implies a need for secure handling of data related to AI-generated materials and criminal investigations. System Integrity is important because it necessitates safeguards against misuse, ensuring that AI technologies are not exploited to create harmful content. Robustness is somewhat relevant due to the legislation's intention to monitor advancements in technology, although its focus is more on protecting against misuse rather than establishing performance benchmarks. Overall, the Social Impact category is most pertinent due to the serious societal implications of the proposed law.


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

The legislation primarily addresses issues related to the judicial system, as it includes legal definitions, penalties, and enforcement actions related to exploitative materials, including AI-generated content. It mandates the establishment of a task force to monitor emerging technologies, which is crucial to the judicial response to such crimes. There are also implications for government agencies, particularly the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security, which is tasked with overseeing public awareness campaigns and funding victim support programs. While aspects of the bill touch on technology's intersection with child protection, it does not directly engage sectors like Healthcare or Academic and Research Institutions. However, the clear focus on legal implications situates this text squarely within the Judicial System category for its regulatory structure and enforcement protocols.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (4) deepfake (1) show keywords in context

Oklahoma HB1983: Schools; media literacy and cybersecurity to be taught in sixth, seventh, or eighth grades; State Department of Education to adopt curriculum standards; effective date.

Description: Schools; media literacy and cybersecurity to be taught in sixth, seventh, or eighth grades; State Department of Education to adopt curriculum standards; effective date.
Summary: The bill mandates that public schools in Oklahoma teach media literacy and cybersecurity to students in sixth to eighth grades, establishing curriculum standards and instructional guidelines by November 1, 2025.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 3, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Trish Ranson (sole sponsor)
Last action: Authored by Representative Ranson (Feb. 3, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact
Data Governance (see reasoning)

The text primarily addresses the implementation of media literacy and cybersecurity education in Oklahoma schools. The relevance of AI is primarily derived from the specific mention of identifying deepfake images, videos, audio, and artificial intelligence as part of the curriculum. This suggests a focus on understanding and combating misinformation potentially generated or propagated by AI technologies. Given this context, the relevant categories vary in terms of their applicability to the legislation. Social Impact relates to the societal implications of misinformation and the ethical use of AI tools in media. Data Governance touches on aspects of protecting personal information and navigating digital environments. System Integrity aligns with the emphasis on teaching critical evaluation of media content which bears on the requirement for reliable information sources. Robustness is less relevant here as there are no direct implications regarding benchmarks or performance of AI systems discussed in the text.


Sector:
Academic and Research Institutions (see reasoning)

The sectors potentially affected by this legislation largely relate to Academia due to its focus on educational standards and curriculum development tailored for students. The relevance to Government Agencies is minimal, despite the State Department of Education being involved. Other sectors, such as Healthcare or Judicial System, have no connection to the content of this text. Therefore, the scoring reflects a significant focus on Academic and Research Institutions, with a marginal consideration of others according to context.


Keywords (occurrence): deepfake (1) show keywords in context

Rhode Island H5123: Requires DOA provide inventory of all state agencies using artificial intelligence (AI); establishes a 13 member permanent commission to monitor the use of AI in state government and makes recommendations for state government policy and other decisions.

Description: STATE AFFAIRS AND GOVERNMENT -- ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE ACCOUNTABILITY ACT - Requires DOA provide inventory of all state agencies using artificial intelligence (AI); establishes a 13 member permanent commission to monitor the use of AI in state government and makes recommendations for state government policy and other decisions.
Summary: The bill establishes the Artificial Intelligence Accountability Act, mandating an inventory of AI usage by state agencies and creating a commission to monitor AI's impact and recommend policies.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Jan. 22, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: John Lombardi (6 total sponsors)
Last action: Introduced, referred to House Innovation, Internet, & Technology (Jan. 22, 2025)

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

The text encompasses legislation aimed at monitoring and regulating the use of artificial intelligence (AI) within state government. It highlights accountability by requiring an inventory of AI systems used across state agencies and establishes a commission to assess their impacts, ensuring they do not lead to unlawful discrimination or other societal issues. This aligns strongly with themes of social impact due to the focus on fairness, discrimination, and societal effects of AI systems. Data governance is also relevant given the text's emphasis on data usage, security, and assessment procedures around AI systems. System integrity is significant due to mandates for transparency and assessment of AI systems and their processes. Robustness is also a consideration, albeit to a lesser extent, as it implies the establishment of benchmarks and policies for continuous assessment of AI performance, which is indirectly referenced but is critical for ongoing compliance and improvement.


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

This legislation is particularly relevant to the 'Government Agencies and Public Services' sector, as it establishes a framework for how artificial intelligence is used within state government, overseeing its implementation, effects, and compliance with ethical guidelines. It is also somewhat relevant to the 'Academic and Research Institutions' sector, considering the commission includes experts from academic backgrounds to inform best practices and guidelines. Other sectors like Politics and Elections, Healthcare, and Private Enterprises do not appear as directly relevant based on the text provided, making this legislation primarily focused on governmental use of AI.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (28) machine learning (2) neural network (1) show keywords in context

Oklahoma SB224: Student data; creating the Oklahoma Education and Workforce Statewide Longitudinal Data System.

Description: Student data; creating the Oklahoma Education and Workforce Statewide Longitudinal Data System.
Summary: The bill establishes the Oklahoma Education and Workforce Efficiency Data System to securely manage and analyze educational and workforce data, aiming to improve outcomes and taxpayer investment.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: March 26, 2025
Status: Engrossed
Primary sponsor: Ally Seifried (3 total sponsors)
Last action: HAs read (May 5, 2025)

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

Ohio SB79: Regulate the use of pricing algorithms

Description: To amend sections 1331.01, 1331.04, and 1331.16 and to enact sections 1331.05 and 1331.50 of the Revised Code to regulate the use of pricing algorithms.
Summary: The bill regulates pricing algorithms by prohibiting the use of nonpublic competitor data, aiming to prevent anti-competitive practices and ensure fair market competition in Ohio.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 4, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Louis Blessing (2 total sponsors)
Last action: Introduced (Feb. 4, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact (see reasoning)

The text primarily discusses the regulation of pricing algorithms, which incorporates artificial intelligence and machine learning techniques. This directly relates to how AI impacts business practices and pricing strategies, which can have social repercussions regarding fairness and bias in pricing decisions. The legislation does not focus explicitly on data governance, system integrity, or the establishment of performance benchmarks, which would typically characterize robustness. Therefore, the most relevant category for this text would fall under Social Impact due to its implications on fairness and accountability in pricing decisions influenced by AI algorithms, with more limited relevance to other categories.


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

This text primarily pertains to the private sector and its use of AI within business contexts, particularly focusing on pricing algorithms that can affect competitive practices. It emphasizes business regulations that will affect how commercial entities set their prices and interact with market data. However, it does not specifically address sectors like government agencies, healthcare, academia, or international standards. Hence, the relevance to the Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment sector is moderate. There is no significant emphasis on political, legal, or institutional use of AI, leading to the lower relevancy scores across those sectors.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (1) algorithm (19) show keywords in context

Oregon HB3936: Relating to the security of state assets.

Description: Bans the use of AI on state assets if the AI is developed or owned by a covered vendor. (Flesch Readability Score: 80.6). [Digest: Bans the use of AI on state assets if the AI is owned or developed by a foreign corporate entity. (Flesch Readability Score: 68.0).] Prohibits any hardware, software or service that uses artificial intelligence from being installed or downloaded onto or used or accessed by state information technology assets if the artificial intelligence is developed or owned by ...
Summary: House Bill 3936 enhances the security of state assets by regulating the use of products from designated "covered vendors," particularly those involving artificial intelligence, to mitigate national security threats.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 12, 2025
Status: Enrolled
Primary sponsor: Darcey Edwards (2 total sponsors)
Last action: Third reading. Carried by Robinson. Passed. Ayes, 27; Excused, 3--Nash, Smith DB, Starr. (June 12, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (6) automated (3) show keywords in context

United States HB1608: Department of Homeland Security Vehicular Terrorism Prevention and Mitigation Act of 2025

Description: To require the Secretary of Homeland Security to produce a report on emerging threats and countermeasures related to vehicular terrorism, and for other purposes.
Summary: The bill mandates the Secretary of Homeland Security to produce a report on vehicular terrorism threats and countermeasures, enhancing public safety and coordinated response strategies against such attacks.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 26, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Carlos Gimenez (2 total sponsors)
Last action: Referred to the Subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. (Feb. 26, 2025)

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

The text of the Department of Homeland Security Vehicular Terrorism Prevention and Mitigation Act of 2025 contains several references to artificial intelligence and machine learning, particularly in the context of threats posed by emerging automotive technologies, including autonomous vehicles and advanced driver assistance systems (ADAS). These technologies are highlighted as creating vulnerabilities that could be exploited for vehicular terrorism, particularly with the mention of AI-enabled technologies and predictive analytics used to detect suspicious behaviors. This aligns the text significantly with the categories of Social Impact, due to its implications for public safety and civil liberties, and Data Governance, given the attention to privacy and civil rights in the deployment of countermeasures. System Integrity is relevant since it discusses technology protocols to monitor and restrict vehicle access, and Robustness is relevant because it touches on the need for guidelines in research and development of security measures. Overall, the text is particularly focused on the societal impacts and governance aspects of AI technologies used in the context of countering vehicular terrorism.


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

The legislation is highly relevant across multiple sectors. It directly addresses Government Agencies and Public Services since it enforces the role of the Department of Homeland Security in managing vehicle-based threats and enhances public service through safety measures. The Judicial System is moderately relevant due to the implications this report may have concerning law enforcement’s response strategies, but it is not a central focus. In terms of Healthcare, there is limited relevance as it touches on healthcare facilities as high-risk locations but does not delve into health systems. It has implications for Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment since the mention of industry collaboration highlights the role of private sector engagement with technology and safety practices. The nature of this legislative document also touches upon International Cooperation and Standards because of its broader implications for the development of security standards in various industries. However, it does not fit squarely into Academic and Research Institutions or Nonprofits and NGOs. Overall, the most significant relevance is with Government Agencies and Public Services and Private Enterprises. The report's focus on technology and AI tools pushes its relevance across these sectors.


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

California AB979: California Cybersecurity Integration Center: artificial intelligence.

Description: An act to amend Section 8586.5 of the Government Code, relating to technology.
Summary: Assembly Bill No. 979 requires the California Cybersecurity Integration Center to develop an AI Cybersecurity Collaboration Playbook by July 1, 2026, to enhance information sharing and strengthen defenses against cyber threats in the AI sector.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: Feb. 20, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Jacqui Irwin (sole sponsor)
Last action: Re-referred to Com. on P. & C.P. (April 24, 2025)

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

The text acknowledges and addresses multiple aspects of artificial intelligence (AI), particularly around cybersecurity and the development of frameworks for AI-related activities. The references to the California AI Cybersecurity Collaboration Playbook and automated decision systems show an emphasis on safeguarding public and private sectors from potential AI-driven threats, connecting closely with the Social Impact category. Additionally, it establishes guidelines for overseeing data sharing related to AI systems, which ties directly into Data Governance. Legislative mandates concerning human oversight and system transparency, necessary for cybersecurity, connect to System Integrity. The standards developed for AI cybersecurity performance also resonate with the Robustness category, as it requires frameworks for assessing and auditing these AI systems. Overall, the legislative focus on AI in various capacities suggests that the bill is highly relevant to each of the categories, especially concerning its implications for society, data handling, system oversight, and performance metrics, warranting a score of 5 in each instance.


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

The bill's provisions significantly impact several sectors, particularly regarding how AI is integrated and regulated within government entities for cybersecurity efforts. The direct mentions of interaction with various state departments and agencies position the legislation in the Government Agencies and Public Services sector. Additionally, the components regarding threat assessment and information sharing also tie into the General Judicial System as it pertains to legal standards surrounding AI's use in public governance. Although less emphasized, certain references to operational collaboration could touch on aspects relevant to nonprofits and NGOs for cybersecurity support. The text focuses primarily on government operations and cybersecurity, prompting strong relevance to the Government Agencies and Public Services sector and moderate relevance to the Judicial System sector. Therefore, it scores a 5 for Government Agencies and Public Services and a 3 for the Judicial System.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (5) show keywords in context

Indiana HB1601: Quantum research tax incentives.

Description: Quantum research tax incentives. Amends the state sales and use tax exemption for data centers to include projects for investments in a quantum computing research, advanced computing, and defense infrastructure network that result in a minimum qualified investment within five years of at least $50,000,000.
Summary: The bill provides property tax incentives for businesses engaging in quantum computing and advanced computing in Indiana, promoting economic development through substantial investments and job creation.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: April 16, 2025
Status: Enrolled
Primary sponsor: Edmond Soliday (10 total sponsors)
Last action: Signed by the President of the Senate (April 23, 2025)

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