5026 results:


Description: This Joint Resolution directing the Artificial Intelligence Commission to work in collaboration with the Secretary of State to create a regulatory sandbox framework for the testing of innovative and novel technologies that utilize agentic artificial intelligence.
Summary: This bill directs the Artificial Intelligence Commission to collaborate with the Secretary of State to develop a regulatory sandbox framework for testing innovative technologies using agentic AI, addressing legal and ethical concerns.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 30, 2025
Status: Enrolled
Primary sponsor: Krista Griffith (5 total sponsors)
Last action: Passed By Senate. Votes: 21 YES (June 30, 2025)

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

The text explicitly pertains to the collaboration between the Artificial Intelligence Commission and the Secretary of State to establish a regulatory sandbox framework for testing agentic AI technologies. This directly aligns with social impacts such as ensuring responsible AI usage and regulatory oversight which relates to societal concerns and the ethical implications of AI in governance, thus making Social Impact highly relevant. The mention of corporate governance and legal considerations indicates a link to Data Governance, especially regarding compliance and safety. System Integrity is also relevant due to the need for oversight and regulation in AI implementation, ensuring that AI systems operate safely and transparently. Robustness is moderately relevant as it touches upon the need for effective testing frameworks but lacks specifics on performance metrics or compliance benchmarks.


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

The text relates to multiple sectors. It predominantly impacts Government Agencies and Public Services as it involves the creation of regulatory frameworks for state technology deployment. It also has implications for Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment by addressing the corporate governance aspects of AI. While it touches on the need for governance and accountability, it does not directly reference politics, healthcare, or judicial systems, making those sectors less relevant. Similarly, it does not align closely with Academic and Research Institutions or International Cooperation and Standards, leading to a lower score across those sectors. Nonetheless, it is applicable to the hybrid or emerging technology context due to the innovative nature of agentic AI.


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

Description: Establishes certain data privacy protection requirements for consumer health data, health care providers, and patients.
Summary: This bill establishes data privacy requirements for consumer health data, mandating consent from consumers for collection, sharing, and deletion, aiming to protect patients' personal health information in New Jersey.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 30, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Raj Mukherji (sole sponsor)
Last action: Introduced in the Senate, Referred to Senate Health, Human Services and Senior Citizens Committee (June 30, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact
Data Governance (see reasoning)

This text primarily focuses on the protection of consumer health data and related privacy requirements. Within the text, certain aspects of data governance are explicitly mentioned, such as the handling of biometric data, consumer consent, data collection, and processing requirements involving algorithms and machine learning techniques. The emphasis on managing consumer health data tightly aligns with data governance considerations, as it addresses the secure and ethical collection, sharing, and processing of health-related information, including the implications of algorithmic decision-making in representing this data. However, there are also implicit implications for social impact since biases and fairness could arise from automated data processing. The relevance to system integrity and robustness is less pronounced, as the text does not delve deeply into security measures or performance benchmarks for AI systems, but rather focuses on legal mandates for data handling. Therefore, there will be a stronger emphasis on data governance due to the explicit connections made in the text related to the management of health data and algorithms used in this context.


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

The legislation is highly relevant to the Healthcare sector, as it directly outlines the rights and privacy protections for consumer health data and specifies the obligations of healthcare providers and entities. It details consent protocols, data privacy, and consumer rights which are critical for healthcare applications. While there may be implications for government agencies, particularly concerning how they handle health data in compliance with privacy standards, the direct focus here remains primarily on healthcare providers and consumers. Other sectors, like Politics and Elections, are not relevant, as this legislation does not address electoral processes or AI within that context. The relevance to Academic and Research Institutions may be considered relevant but is less direct compared to healthcare. Therefore, the score for Healthcare is high due to the clear applicability, and lower scores are given to other sectors as their relevance is either minimal or not applicable.


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

Description: To provide for reconciliation pursuant to title II of H. Con. Res. 14.
Summary: The FEHB Protection Act of 2025 proposes various amendments to enhance agricultural support, military readiness, tax relief for families and businesses, and streamline health care program efficiencies, focusing on economic recovery and support for various sectors.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 27, 2025
Status: Engrossed
Primary sponsor: Jody Arrington (sole sponsor)
Last action: Message on Senate action sent to the House. (July 1, 2025)

Category: None (see reasoning)

The text provided primarily focuses on legislative processes, budget reconciliation, and provisions tied to chapters concerning agriculture, armed services, banking, and energy policy. The only mention of AI relates to the enhancement of 'transformational artificial intelligence models' found in the energy section. However, the broader implications of AI on societal structures or ethics are not addressed in this text. Therefore, while the term AI appears in the context of potential advancements, there's a lack of substantive discussion on impact, governance, integrity, or robustness of AI systems. This leads to limited relevance to each of the categories, as the predominant themes in this text do not align closely with the specified criteria.


Sector: None (see reasoning)

The legislative focus in this text is on agricultural policies, defense funding, banking regulations, and energy reforms, with no explicit mention of AI applications in sectors like politics, healthcare, or legal systems. Although the energy section references AI models, it lacks any specific mention of AI use in governmental or public service contexts, nor does it address political processes or judicial systems. As such, the text does not provide substantial relevance to the categories of sectors defined, which typically require more direct implications or mentions of AI in their practices.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (9) machine learning (1) automated (2) show keywords in context

Description: A bill to direct the Federal Trade Commission to require impact assessments of automated decision systems and augmented critical decision processes, and for other purposes.
Summary: The Algorithmic Accountability Act of 2025 mandates the Federal Trade Commission to require impact assessments for automated decision systems, ensuring consumer protection and accountability in significant decision-making processes by certain entities.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 25, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Ron Wyden (8 total sponsors)
Last action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. (June 25, 2025)

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

The text of the bill primarily focuses on the impact assessments required for automated decision systems and augmented critical decision processes, which relates strongly to accountability and ethical considerations in the deployment of AI technologies. As it emphasizes the consequences these systems have on consumers and society, it is highly relevant to the Social Impact category. The Data Governance category is also relevant because the bill mandates that covered entities maintain documentation of impact assessments, thus ensuring the responsible management of data used in these systems. System Integrity is addressed as well since the bill seeks to enforce compliance with regulations designed to ensure transparency and security in the implementation of these AI systems. Lastly, Robustness is somewhat addressed through the implications of conducting impact assessments and adhering to standards, but not directly covering benchmarks or certifications mentioned in this category description. Overall, the scores reflect strong relevance to Social Impact and Data Governance while noting moderate relevance in System Integrity and lower relevance in Robustness.


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

The bill relates primarily to Government Agencies and Public Services as it directs the Federal Trade Commission, a government entity, to enforce the new regulations on automated decision systems. There are also implications for the Judicial System, particularly regarding consumer rights and protections based on automated decisions which could affect legal outcomes. The text does not directly pertain to healthcare, politics, academic settings, or other specified sectors, as the focus is primarily on automated decision systems rather than their application in specific sectors like healthcare or politics. Given that, Government Agencies and Public Services ranks highest for its direct implications and regulatory enforcement, whereas the Judicial System has moderate relevance due to concerns around legal impacts from automated decisions.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (3) machine learning (1) automated (44) show keywords in context

Description: A bill to direct the Federal Trade Commission to require impact assessments of automated decision systems and augmented critical decision processes, and for other purposes.
Summary: The Algorithmic Accountability Act requires the Federal Trade Commission to mandate impact assessments for automated decision systems and critical decision processes, ensuring transparency and consumer protection.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 25, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Ron Wyden (8 total sponsors)
Last action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. (June 25, 2025)

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

The text of the bill primarily focuses on the impact assessments required for automated decision systems and augmented critical decision processes, which relates strongly to accountability and ethical considerations in the deployment of AI technologies. As it emphasizes the consequences these systems have on consumers and society, it is highly relevant to the Social Impact category. The Data Governance category is also relevant because the bill mandates that covered entities maintain documentation of impact assessments, thus ensuring the responsible management of data used in these systems. System Integrity is addressed as well since the bill seeks to enforce compliance with regulations designed to ensure transparency and security in the implementation of these AI systems. Lastly, Robustness is somewhat addressed through the implications of conducting impact assessments and adhering to standards, but not directly covering benchmarks or certifications mentioned in this category description. Overall, the scores reflect strong relevance to Social Impact and Data Governance while noting moderate relevance in System Integrity and lower relevance in Robustness.


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

The bill relates primarily to Government Agencies and Public Services as it directs the Federal Trade Commission, a government entity, to enforce the new regulations on automated decision systems. There are also implications for the Judicial System, particularly regarding consumer rights and protections based on automated decisions which could affect legal outcomes. The text does not directly pertain to healthcare, politics, academic settings, or other specified sectors, as the focus is primarily on automated decision systems rather than their application in specific sectors like healthcare or politics. Given that, Government Agencies and Public Services ranks highest for its direct implications and regulatory enforcement, whereas the Judicial System has moderate relevance due to concerns around legal impacts from automated decisions.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (3) machine learning (1) automated (44) show keywords in context

Description: Joint Order, to Carry Over Certain Matters from the First Special Session of the 132nd Legislature
Summary: The bill carries over various legislative matters from the First Special Session of the 132nd Legislature for consideration in future sessions, addressing topics such as transportation, healthcare, taxation, and housing.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 25, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Teresa Pierce (sole sponsor)
Last action: In concurrence. ORDERED SENT FORTHWITH. (June 25, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (1) automated (1)

Description: Trade: business regulation; requirements and safety standards for developers of certain artificial intelligence models; provide for.
Summary: The bill establishes safety and security protocols for large developers of artificial intelligence models to manage critical risks, promote employee protections, and enforce compliance through civil sanctions.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 24, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Sarah Lightner (sole sponsor)
Last action: Bill Electronically Reproduced 06/24/2025 (June 25, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (2) foundation model (14) show keywords in context

Description: Crimes: other; use of artificial intelligence to commit certain crimes; prohibit.
Summary: House Bill No. 4667 prohibits using artificial intelligence to commit crimes in Michigan, establishing felony charges and mandatory prison sentences for those who develop or utilize AI for illegal purposes.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 24, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Sarah Lightner (sole sponsor)
Last action: Bill Electronically Reproduced 06/24/2025 (June 25, 2025)

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

Description: Trade: business regulation; requirements and safety standards for developers of certain artificial intelligence models; provide for. Creates new act.
Summary: The bill establishes safety and security protocols for large developers of artificial intelligence models, aiming to manage critical risks, protect employees, and enforce compliance through civil sanctions and auditing.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 24, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Sarah Lightner (sole sponsor)
Last action: Bill Electronically Reproduced 06/24/2025 (June 25, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (2) foundation model (14) show keywords in context

Description: Crimes: other; use of artificial intelligence to commit certain crimes; prohibit. Amends 1931 PA 328 (MCL 750.1 - 750.568) by adding sec. 411y.
Summary: The bill criminalizes the use of artificial intelligence (AI) to facilitate crimes in Michigan, imposing felony charges and mandatory prison sentences for offenders while ensuring consecutive sentences for related crimes.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 24, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Sarah Lightner (sole sponsor)
Last action: Bill Electronically Reproduced 06/24/2025 (June 25, 2025)

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

Description: ELECTIONS -- DECEPTIVE AND FRAUDULENT SYNTHETIC MEDIA IN ELECTION COMMUNICATIONS - Creates the deceptive and fraudulent synthetic media in election communications chapter to regulate the use of synthetic media in elections.
Summary: The bill regulates the use of deceptive synthetic media in election communications, prohibiting its distribution within 90 days of elections unless properly disclosed, to protect electoral integrity.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 20, 2025
Status: Engrossed
Primary sponsor: Louis Dipalma (10 total sponsors)
Last action: Transmitted to Governor (June 27, 2025)

Category:
Societal Impact (see reasoning)

The text explicitly addresses the use of synthetic media, specifically regarding deceptive and fraudulent applications within election communications. It establishes regulations to mitigate the risks associated with the misuse of AI to create misleading content in campaigns. This directly implicates the social impact of AI as it aims to protect the integrity of elections and public trust. It does not cover data governance, system integrity, or robustness in a way that demonstrates a clear focus, as the main concern is the regulation of synthetic media rather than the underlying data management or systemic frameworks.


Sector:
Politics and Elections (see reasoning)

The legislation focuses on elections and the integrity of the electoral process by regulating the use of synthetic media. As it pertains directly to deceptive practices in election communications and emphasizes the ramifications for candidates and campaign entities, it falls squarely within the realm of Politics and Elections. While there are mentions of broader themes that could touch on government operations and public trust, those do not form a substantial part of the legislation and thus do not warrant higher relevance. Other sectors such as healthcare, the judicial system, and private enterprises do not connect closely with the content of this act.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (1) synthetic media (17) show keywords in context

Description: An Act establishing the Keystone Artificial Intelligence Authority within the Department of Community and Economic Development; providing for the duties of authority and its governing board; providing for duties of other entities; establishing the Artificial Intelligence Permitting System Pilot Program within the Department of Environmental Protection; establishing the Keystone Artificial Intelligence Development Fund; and providing for sovereign immunity.
Summary: The bill establishes the Keystone Artificial Intelligence Authority within Pennsylvania's Department of Community and Economic Development to streamline permitting for artificial intelligence and related industries, promoting development and efficiency.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 20, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Jason Ortitay (3 total sponsors)
Last action: Referred to COMMUNICATIONS AND TECHNOLOGY (June 20, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (15) machine learning (1) show keywords in context

Description: A bill to establish the Task Force on Artificial Intelligence in the Financial Services Sector to report to Congress on issues related to artificial intelligence in the financial services sector, and for other purposes.
Summary: The bill establishes a Task Force on Artificial Intelligence in the Financial Services Sector to report to Congress on AI-related security issues, benefits, and legislative recommendations for consumer protection.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 18, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Jon Husted (2 total sponsors)
Last action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs. (June 18, 2025)

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

This legislation is highly relevant to Social Impact as it directly addresses issues related to the unique threats that artificial intelligence poses to customer safety and the potential for identity and data theft. The bill acknowledges the societal implications of AI applications in banking and consumer interactions, making it very relevant to discussions on consumer protections and interactions with AI. Data Governance is also relevant due to the emphasis on protecting consumer identities and data from AI abuses, highlighting the need for regulations to ensure security against potential fraud facilitated by AI technologies. System Integrity is pertinent since the bill discusses the risks associated with AI and includes mandates for practices that protect consumers, which suggests a focus on the integrity of AI systems in financial services. Robustness, while relevant on some level due to the mention of standards for definitions of AI-related terms, is not a primary focus of this bill. Therefore, the strongest relevance is found in Social Impact and Data Governance, followed by System Integrity, while Robustness is less applicable.


Sector: None (see reasoning)

This legislation has a direct bearing on the Financial Services sector as it establishes a Task Force specifically focused on the impacts of artificial intelligence within this context. It addresses concerns unique to the sector, such as the use of AI in banking and credit services, which underscores its relevance. Other sectors like Politics and Elections, Healthcare, or Nonprofits do not pertain to the content of this bill. Therefore, the strongest fit is clearly with the Financial Services sector.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (11) machine learning (1) deepfake (1) show keywords in context

Description: Modifies child endangerment statute to include AI technology; establishes criminal penalties.
Summary: The bill amends New Jersey's child endangerment statute to include criminal penalties for using AI technology to expose children to sexual conduct, addressing safety concerns around simulated interactions.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 16, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Andrea Katz (3 total sponsors)
Last action: Introduced, Referred to Assembly Public Safety and Preparedness Committee (June 16, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (1) automated (4) chatbot (3) show keywords in context

Description: A bill to establish immunity from civil liability for certain artificial intelligence developers, and for other purposes.
Summary: The RISE Act of 2025 establishes civil liability immunity for AI developers when their products are used by professionals, contingent on transparency and accountability measures, to encourage responsible AI innovation.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 12, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Cynthia Lummis (sole sponsor)
Last action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. (June 12, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (31) automated (1) show keywords in context

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

Description: Regulates the development and use of certain artificial intelligence systems to prevent algorithmic discrimination; requires independent audits of high risk AI systems; provides for enforcement by the attorney general as well as a private right of action.
Summary: The New York AI Act regulates artificial intelligence systems to prevent algorithmic discrimination, mandates independent audits of high-risk AI, and allows enforcement by the attorney general and private citizens.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 12, 2025
Status: Engrossed
Primary sponsor: Kristen Gonzalez (16 total sponsors)
Last action: referred to ways and means (June 12, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (10) automated (1) show keywords in context

Description: Requires synthetic content creations system providers to include provenance data on synthetic content produced or modified by a synthetic content creations system that such provider makes available.
Summary: The "Stop Deepfakes Act" requires providers of synthetic content creation systems to apply provenance data to any synthetic content they produce or modify, enhancing transparency about its origin and modifications.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 12, 2025
Status: Engrossed
Primary sponsor: Andrew Gounardes (sole sponsor)
Last action: ordered to third reading rules cal.900 (June 17, 2025)

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

The text pertains to the inclusion of provenance data for synthetic content produced by generative artificial intelligence systems. This closely aligns with 'Social Impact' as it addresses the potential for misinformation through deepfakes, necessitating accountability and consumer protection measures. Regarding 'Data Governance', the provenance requirements also highlight the need for accurate data management as it affects content authenticity and accountability. 'System Integrity' is relevant since the legislation mandates transparency measures around the use of AI systems in content generation, emphasizing human oversight in verifying the provenance of synthetic content. However, it does not specifically address the integrity of the systems themselves or security measures against AI misuse. Finally, while 'Robustness' could be relevant if the legislation included benchmarks for AI performance, it primarily focuses on data provenance and usage rather than performance standards or compliance audits. Therefore, 'Social Impact' and 'Data Governance' resonate very strongly with the text, while 'System Integrity' is less so. 'Robustness' appears to be irrelevant.


Sector:
Politics and Elections
Government Agencies and Public Services (see reasoning)

The text particularly highlights how generative artificial intelligence is being regulated in terms of content provenance, which is crucial for sectors like 'Politics and Elections' due to the implications for misinformation. However, it primarily impacts the 'Government Agencies and Public Services' sector as it mandates that state agencies apply provenance data to digital content published or distributed. The focus on misinformation makes it tangentially relevant to 'Judicial System' since the accuracy of evidence can be affected by AI-generated content, but this is not the main focus of the document. The healthcare, private enterprises, academic institutions, and nonprofit sectors don't seem directly focused on, given the context of synthetic media regulation. There is little mention of international cooperation unless licenses or standards are considered across state lines in the future. Thus, 'Government Agencies and Public Services' is the primary relevant sector, with slight relevance to 'Politics and Elections' and 'Judicial System'.


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

Description: To amend sections 3517.153, 3517.154, 3517.155, 3517.993, and 3599.40 and to enact section 3517.24 of the Revised Code to regulate the dissemination of deceptive and fraudulent synthetic media for the purpose of influencing the results of an election.
Summary: This bill aims to regulate the use and dissemination of deceptive synthetic media designed to influence election outcomes in Ohio, ensuring transparency and accountability in election-related communications.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 12, 2025
Status: Introduced
Primary sponsor: Joseph Miller (10 total sponsors)
Last action: Introduced (June 12, 2025)

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

The legislation clearly addresses the implications of synthetic media, with a specific focus on its potential to mislead individuals during elections, which aligns with the Social Impact category. The text discusses consumer protections regarding deceptive media and accountability measures for those who disseminate such media, indicating that it is relevant to societal harm and misinformation caused by AI-generated content. The Data Governance category is also relevant since it addresses requirements for transparency in synthetic media, focusing on maintaining the integrity of data presented to the public by mandating disclosures about AI manipulation. System Integrity is somewhat relevant as it emphasizes the need for oversight in the release of AI-generated synthetic media, but it is less focused on security and technical standards. Robustness is not particularly relevant as the legislation does not discuss performance benchmarking of AI systems but focuses on regulation of deceptive practices. Overall, the strongest relevance is found in the Social Impact and Data Governance categories, followed by System Integrity.


Sector:
Politics and Elections
Government Agencies and Public Services (see reasoning)

This legislation directly pertains to the sector of Politics and Elections, as it regulates the use of AI in the context of electoral processes by addressing the dissemination of deceptive synthetic media in political campaigns. The implications of synthetic media for misleading voters are crucial to ensuring fair electoral practices. The relevance to Government Agencies and Public Services is moderate, as the enforcement and oversight mechanisms involve state bodies like the Ohio elections commission, but these mechanisms are fundamentally tied to electoral integrity and not general public services. The legislation does not specifically address the Judicial System, Healthcare, Private Enterprises, Labor, and Employment, Academic and Research Institutions, International Cooperation and Standards, Nonprofits and NGOs, or Hybrid, Emerging, and Unclassified sectors. Thus, the most significant relevance is in the Politics and Elections sector.


Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (2) synthetic media (12) show keywords in context

Description: Regulates automated decision-making by government agencies; requires agencies to conduct impact assessments; requires disclosure of automated decision-making tools utilized by governmental agencies.
Summary: This bill regulates automated decision-making by government agencies in New York, mandating impact assessments, tool disclosures, and ensuring no harmful impacts on employee rights or benefits.
Collection: Legislation
Status date: June 12, 2025
Status: Engrossed
Primary sponsor: Kristen Gonzalez (9 total sponsors)
Last action: returned to senate (June 16, 2025)

Keywords (occurrence): artificial intelligence (22) automated (69) show keywords in context
Feedback form