AI systems raise privacy questions existing law was not drafted for, starting with whether a model trained on personal data can meaningfully delete it. This hub covers the state AI statutes and regulator guidance now trying to answer that.
AI & Privacy
October 19, 2026
Tennessee's Ensuring Likeness, Voice, and Image Security Act, enacted as Public Chapter 588 and effective July 1, 2024, renamed the state's 1984 publicity statute, added a voice right that covers simulations, and created civil liability for public distribution of unauthorized voices or likenesses and for tools whose primary purpose is producing a particular person's voice or likeness.
Read more →
AI & Privacy
October 12, 2026
Utah's SB 149 took effect May 1, 2024, creating an Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy, a regulatory sandbox and a rule that a business using generative AI must admit it when asked. SB 226 of 2025 moved that duty to chapter 77 of Title 13 and narrowed it, HB 452 added mental health chatbot rules, and the office's own chapter is set to be repealed July 1, 2027.
Read more →
Automated Decision-Making
September 7, 2026
Colorado's 2024 artificial intelligence statute was delayed once, then repealed and reenacted before it ever took effect. Senate Bill 26-189, signed May 14, 2026, replaced part 17 of article 1 of title 6 with a framework keyed to automated decision-making technology. Consequential decision survived as the trigger; the algorithmic discrimination duty did not.
Read more →
CCPA / CPRA
September 1, 2026
The California Privacy Protection Agency's rulemaking package on automated decisionmaking technology, risk assessments and cybersecurity audits took effect January 1, 2026, and the obligations it creates switch on across four separate years. This reports what the approved text defines, whom each article reaches by its own terms, and the dates written into it.
Read more →
AI & Privacy
August 24, 2026
There is no general American law on algorithmic decisions. What exists is a set of narrow regimes reaching them from different directions: California ADMT rules attaching to decisions in named life domains, profiling opt-outs in the state comprehensive statutes, employment statutes imposing audits and notice, and an FTC remedy that reaches the model itself.
Read more →
Facial Recognition
August 24, 2026
There is no national facial recognition statute, and the law that exists does not divide by state so much as by who is operating the system. Government deployment has produced warrant requirements, accountability reports and mandatory human review. Private deployment has produced one outright municipal ban and a federal enforcement order. This guide sorts the rules along that line.
Read more →