{"table":"instruments","corpusVersion":"1.0.0","generatedAt":"2026-07-21T12:00:00Z","demo":false,"license":"CC BY 4.0 — cite AI Tribune (aitribune.org)","count":55,"rows":[{"id":"us-ostp-rfi-2025","name":"OSTP Request for Information on the AI Action Plan","shortName":"OSTP AI Action Plan RFI","kind":"consultation","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"Executive — OSTP / NSF","status":"Closed, 10,068 submissions received","statusDate":"2025-03-15","url":"https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/02/06/2025-02305/request-for-information-on-the-development-of-an-artificial-intelligence-ai-action-plan","summary":"The comment docket that shaped the July 2025 AI Action Plan. The single richest single-venue record of who wants what from US federal AI policy."},{"id":"us-eo-14179","name":"Executive Order 14179 — Removing Barriers to American Leadership in AI","shortName":"EO 14179","kind":"executive-order","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"Executive","status":"In force","statusDate":"2025-01-23","url":"https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2025/01/31/2025-02172/removing-barriers-to-american-leadership-in-artificial-intelligence","summary":"Revoked EO 14110 and ordered the AI Action Plan. The frame-setting instrument for the 2025 US federal posture."},{"id":"us-ai-action-plan","name":"America's AI Action Plan","shortName":"AI Action Plan","kind":"report","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"Executive — White House","status":"Published, ~90 policy actions","statusDate":"2025-07-23","url":"https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Americas-AI-Action-Plan.pdf","summary":"The administration's blueprint. Directs agencies to consider a state's AI regulatory climate in funding decisions and to encourage open-weight models, both traceable to specific RFI asks."},{"id":"us-hr1-moratorium","name":"H.R. 1 (OBBBA) — proposed 10-year moratorium on state AI enforcement","shortName":"H.R. 1 AI moratorium","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"119th Congress","status":"Stripped by Senate amendment, 99–1","statusDate":"2025-07-01","url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1","summary":"The House-passed reconciliation bill carried a decade-long pause on state AI-law enforcement. The Senate removed it 99–1, the clearest single vote ever taken on the preemption ask."},{"id":"us-preemption-eo-draft","name":"Executive Order 14365 — Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence","shortName":"EO 14365 (AI preemption)","kind":"executive-order","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"Executive","status":"Signed December 11, 2025 (the November 2025 leaked draft 'Eliminating State Law Obstruction of National AI Policy' became this EO); DOJ AI Litigation Task Force announced January 9, 2026 and litigating against Colorado's AI Act; legislative recommendations released March 20, 2026","statusDate":"2025-12-11","url":"https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/12/eliminating-state-law-obstruction-of-national-artificial-intelligence-policy/","summary":"Directs a DOJ task force to challenge state AI laws in court; orders Commerce (within 90 days) to identify 'onerous' state AI laws and condition BEAD non-deployment broadband funds on them; directs an FCC proceeding on a federal AI reporting/disclosure standard and an FTC policy statement on state laws requiring altered model outputs; orders draft federal preemptive legislation. Carve-outs for child safety, data-center infrastructure, and state procurement. Standing alone it lacks preemptive force."},{"id":"us-ca-sb1047","name":"California SB 1047 — Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier AI Models Act","shortName":"CA SB 1047","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"California Legislature, 2023–24","status":"Vetoed","statusDate":"2024-09-29","url":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB1047","summary":"The first serious state frontier-safety bill. Passed both chambers; vetoed. Its asks did not die, they were re-vehicled into SB 53 and the NY RAISE Act."},{"id":"us-ca-sb53","name":"California SB 53 — Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act","shortName":"CA SB 53","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"California Legislature, 2025–26","status":"Signed into law","statusDate":"2025-09-29","url":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB53","summary":"Requires large frontier developers to publish safety frameworks and report critical incidents. The transparency ask, adopted, one year after the liability version was vetoed."},{"id":"us-ny-raise","name":"New York RAISE Act — Responsible AI Safety and Education Act","shortName":"NY RAISE Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"New York Legislature, 2025","status":"Signed December 19, 2025 with negotiated chapter amendments; final chapter amendment signed March 27, 2026; effective January 1, 2027","statusDate":"2026-03-27","url":"https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2025/S6953","summary":"Frontier-developer safety-plan and incident-reporting requirements for New York, the second state to adopt the transparency ask."},{"id":"us-co-sb205","name":"Colorado SB 24-205 — Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence","shortName":"Colorado AI Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"Colorado General Assembly","status":"Never took effect: implementation delayed to June 30, 2026 (SB25B-004, Aug 2025); enforcement suspended by stipulated order April 27, 2026 in xAI v. Colorado (DOJ companion complaint April 24, 2026); repealed and reenacted as SB 26-189 (signed May 14, 2026)","statusDate":"2026-05-14","url":"https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb24-205","summary":"The first comprehensive US algorithmic-discrimination statute. Its delay in an August 2025 special session is the deferral ask succeeding at state level."},{"id":"us-ntia-open-weights","name":"NTIA Report on Dual-Use Foundation Models with Widely Available Weights","shortName":"NTIA open-weights report","kind":"report","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"Executive — NTIA","status":"Published, recommended monitoring over restriction","statusDate":"2024-07-30","url":"https://www.ntia.gov/programs-and-initiatives/artificial-intelligence/open-model-weights-report","summary":"The government's answer to the open-weights question: collect evidence, don't restrict. Its comment docket recorded both sides of the ask."},{"id":"us-chip-security-act","name":"Chip Security Act (S. 1705 / H.R. 3447)","shortName":"Chip Security Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"119th Congress","status":"H.R. 3447 ordered reported (as substitute) by House Foreign Affairs 42–0 on March 26, 2026; Senate companion S. 1705 in committee","statusDate":"2026-03-26","url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/1705","summary":"Location-verification for exported AI chips, the chip-smuggling enforcement ask in bill form."},{"id":"eu-ai-act","name":"Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 — Artificial Intelligence Act","shortName":"EU AI Act","kind":"regulation","jurisdiction":"EU","legislature":"European Parliament & Council","status":"In force; prohibitions applied 2 Feb 2025, GPAI obligations 2 Aug 2025, Art. 50 transparency applies 2 Aug 2026; high-risk dates moved to 2 Dec 2027 (Annex III) and 2 Aug 2028 (Annex I) by the Digital Omnibus amendment (June 2026)","statusDate":"2026-06-29","url":"https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/reg/2024/1689/oj","summary":"The world's most comprehensive AI statute, and the target of the highest-volume deferral and simplification campaign in the register."},{"id":"eu-gpai-cop","name":"EU General-Purpose AI Code of Practice","shortName":"GPAI Code of Practice","kind":"code-of-practice","jurisdiction":"EU","legislature":"European Commission — AI Office","status":"Published; signatures split industry","statusDate":"2025-07-10","url":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/contents-code-gpai","summary":"The voluntary compliance route for GPAI obligations. Google signed with reservations; Meta declined publicly, a natural experiment in who accepts what."},{"id":"eu-digital-omnibus","name":"Digital Omnibus — AI Act amendment proposal","shortName":"EU Digital Omnibus","kind":"regulation","jurisdiction":"EU","legislature":"European Commission → Parliament & Council","status":"Adopted: Parliament plenary 16 Jun 2026 (423–57, 174 abstentions), Council final approval 29 Jun 2026; final act signed 8 Jul 2026; Official Journal publication pending as of mid-Jul 2026. Postpones high-risk obligations to 2 Dec 2027 (Annex III) and 2 Aug 2028 (Annex I).","statusDate":"2026-06-29","url":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/digital-omnibus","summary":"The Commission's simplification package (Digital Omnibus on AI, COM(2025) 836, proposed 19 Nov 2025). Carries the deferral ask industry filed all year, and that 133 civil-society organisations opposed in an open letter. The 7 May 2026 trilogue deal fixed high-risk dates at 2 Dec 2027 / 2 Aug 2028, trimmed Art. 49(2) registration transparency, and added a new Art. 5 prohibition on AI-generated non-consensual intimate imagery and CSAM."},{"id":"eu-hys-simplification","name":"Have Your Say — Digital Omnibus call for evidence","shortName":"Digital omnibus consultation","kind":"consultation","jurisdiction":"EU","legislature":"European Commission","status":"Closed","statusDate":"2025-10-14","url":"https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/better-regulation/have-your-say/initiatives/14622-Digital-package-on-simplification-Digital-omnibus_en","summary":"The feedback window that preceded the omnibus. Where the December-2027 deferral ask was filed on the record."},{"id":"uk-dua-act","name":"Data (Use and Access) Act 2025","shortName":"UK DUA Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"UK","legislature":"UK Parliament","status":"Royal Assent after five rounds of ping-pong on AI transparency amendments","statusDate":"2025-06-19","url":"https://bills.parliament.uk/bills/3825","summary":"The vehicle the training-transparency ask rode in the UK. The Kidron amendments forced repeated Lords–Commons exchanges before being dropped."},{"id":"uk-copyright-consultation","name":"UK Copyright and Artificial Intelligence consultation","shortName":"UK copyright & AI consultation","kind":"consultation","jurisdiction":"UK","legislature":"IPO / DSIT","status":"Closed, ~11,500 responses; statement of progress laid 15 Dec 2025; statutory Report on Copyright and AI published 18 Mar 2026 without adopting any consultation option","statusDate":"2026-03-18","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/copyright-and-artificial-intelligence","summary":"Proposed a text-and-data-mining exception with rights reservation. The central UK venue for both sides of the training-copyright question."},{"id":"us-no-fakes","name":"NO FAKES Act (S. 1367 / H.R. 2794; revised as S. 4591, NO FAKES Act of 2026)","shortName":"NO FAKES Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"119th Congress","status":"Reintroduced April 9, 2025; revised NO FAKES Act of 2026 (S. 4591) reported to the Senate and placed on the Legislative Calendar (No. 446) June 24, 2026","statusDate":"2026-06-24","url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/1367","summary":"Federal digital-replica right for voice and likeness, the consent-and-compensation ask for performers."},{"id":"us-eo-14110","name":"Executive Order 14110: Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence","shortName":"EO 14110","kind":"executive-order","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Executive Branch","status":"Revoked January 20, 2025 (EO 14148 initial rescissions); EO 14179 (Jan 23, 2025) directed agencies to suspend or rescind actions taken under it","statusDate":"2025-01-20","url":"https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/10/30/executive-order-on-the-safe-secure-and-trustworthy-development-and-use-of-artificial-intelligence/","summary":"Signed October 30, 2023. Used Defense Production Act authority (Sec. 4.2) to require developers of dual-use foundation models above a 10^26-operations compute threshold to report training runs, red-team results, and model-weight security to the federal government; directed IaaS know-your-customer rules, NIST red-teaming guidance, and agency actions on civil rights, workers, and CBRN risk. Revoked at the start of the second Trump administration."},{"id":"us-omb-m2410","name":"OMB Memorandum M-24-10: Advancing Governance, Innovation, and Risk Management for Agency Use of Artificial Intelligence","shortName":"OMB M-24-10","kind":"code-of-practice","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Executive Branch (OMB)","status":"Rescinded and replaced by OMB M-25-21 and M-25-22 on April 3, 2025","statusDate":"2025-04-03","url":"https://bidenwhitehouse.archives.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/M-24-10-Advancing-Governance-Innovation-and-Risk-Management-for-Agency-Use-of-Artificial-Intelligence.pdf","summary":"Issued March 28, 2024 under EO 14110. Required agencies to name Chief AI Officers and apply minimum risk-management practices to rights-impacting and safety-impacting AI uses. Replaced in April 2025 by M-25-21/M-25-22, which reframe federal AI policy around accelerating adoption."},{"id":"us-omb-m2521","name":"OMB Memoranda M-25-21 (Accelerating Federal Use of AI through Innovation, Governance, and Public Trust) and M-25-22 (Driving Efficient Acquisition of Artificial Intelligence in Government)","shortName":"OMB M-25-21/M-25-22","kind":"code-of-practice","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Executive Branch (OMB)","status":"In effect since April 3, 2025; implements EO 14179; replaced Biden-era M-24-10 and M-24-18","statusDate":"2025-04-03","url":"https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/02/M-25-21-Accelerating-Federal-Use-of-AI-through-Innovation-Governance-and-Public-Trust.pdf","summary":"Signed by OMB Director Russell Vought on April 3, 2025 to implement EO 14179. M-25-21 directs agencies to accelerate AI use with streamlined governance for 'high-impact' AI; M-25-22 governs AI procurement, emphasizing a competitive American AI marketplace and performance tracking."},{"id":"us-bis-diffusion-rule","name":"BIS Framework for Artificial Intelligence Diffusion (interim final rule)","shortName":"AI Diffusion Rule","kind":"rulemaking","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Department of Commerce (BIS)","status":"Rescinded May 13, 2025, two days before its compliance date; BIS issued replacement guidance on PRC chip diversion (incl. Huawei Ascend) and promised a successor rule; in Jan 2026 Commerce codified conditional NVIDIA H200 exports to China","statusDate":"2025-05-13","url":"https://www.bis.gov/press-release/department-commerce-announces-rescission-biden-era-artificial-intelligence-diffusion-rule-strengthens","summary":"Issued January 15, 2025 in the closing days of the Biden administration: a three-tier global licensing framework for advanced AI chips and model weights. Opposed publicly by NVIDIA, Microsoft, and ITI; rescinded by the Trump administration on May 13, 2025 and replaced with diversion-focused guidance rather than country caps."},{"id":"us-eo-14319-woke-ai","name":"Executive Order 14319: Preventing Woke AI in the Federal Government","shortName":"EO 14319 (Woke AI)","kind":"executive-order","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Executive Branch","status":"In force; signed July 23, 2025 alongside the AI Action Plan; OMB issued implementing procurement guidance as Memorandum M-26-04 on December 11, 2025 (LLM solicitations and orders issued after that date must include Unbiased AI Principles compliance terms; vendors must supply transparency artifacts such as acceptable use policies and model cards)","statusDate":"2025-12-11","url":"https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/07/preventing-woke-ai-in-the-federal-government/","summary":"Requires federal agencies to procure only large language models complying with two 'Unbiased AI Principles', truth-seeking and ideological neutrality (no DEI-encoded outputs), with compliance demonstrable via disclosure of system prompts and evaluations rather than model weights. Imposes transparency terms on AI vendors through federal contracts."},{"id":"us-eo-14409-frontier-security","name":"Executive Order 14409: Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security","shortName":"EO 14409 (frontier security)","kind":"executive-order","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Executive Branch","status":"In force; signed June 2, 2026; voluntary pre-release engagement framework and classified cyber-capability benchmarking being stood up; explicitly disclaims creating any mandatory licensing, preclearance, or permitting requirement","statusDate":"2026-06-02","url":"https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2026/06/promoting-advanced-artificial-intelligence-innovation-and-security/","summary":"Creates a voluntary process for frontier developers to give federal agencies up to 30 days pre-release access to 'covered frontier models' for cybersecurity testing; moves cyber-capability benchmarking into a classified process led by NSA/Treasury/DHS-CISA with NIST consulted; directs AI-enabled cyber defense and enforcement against AI-enabled cyberattacks. Following it, CAISI was reported to have stopped publishing public model-evaluation findings, drawing bipartisan criticism (e.g., Sen. Budd, June 30, 2026)."},{"id":"us-natl-ai-framework","name":"White House National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence (Legislative Recommendations)","shortName":"National AI Policy Framework","kind":"report","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Executive Branch","status":"Released March 20, 2026 pursuant to EO 14365 Sec. 8; transmitted as legislative recommendations to Congress; no federal preemption statute enacted as of July 2026","statusDate":"2026-03-20","url":"https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/03.20.26-National-Policy-Framework-for-Artificial-Intelligence-Legislative-Recommendations.pdf","summary":"Seven-part legislative blueprint proposing a federal baseline for AI policy that would preempt state AI laws creating 'undue burdens,' with exceptions for child protection, consumer protection/fraud, zoning and siting, and state procurement. Covers child safety, communities, infrastructure, intellectual property, free speech, innovation, and workforce development."},{"id":"us-safe-innovation","name":"SAFE Innovation Framework and Senate AI Insight Forums","shortName":"SAFE Innovation / Insight Forums","kind":"inquiry","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Senate","status":"Concluded. Framework launched June 21, 2023; nine closed-door AI Insight Forums convened Sept–Dec 2023 with 150+ participants; process fed into the May 2024 Senate AI roadmap.","statusDate":"2024-05-15","url":"https://www.csis.org/analysis/sen-chuck-schumer-launches-safe-innovation-ai-age-csis","summary":"Majority Leader Schumer's framework (Security, Accountability, Foundations, Explainability + Innovation) and the bipartisan Schumer-Rounds-Heinrich-Young Insight Forum series, the Senate's chosen process for AI legislation in 2023 in lieu of committee-drafted omnibus bills."},{"id":"us-senate-ai-roadmap","name":"Driving U.S. Innovation in Artificial Intelligence: A Roadmap for Artificial Intelligence Policy in the United States Senate","shortName":"Senate AI roadmap (May 2024)","kind":"report","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Senate","status":"Released May 15, 2024 by the Bipartisan Senate AI Working Group (Schumer, Rounds, Heinrich, Young). No omnibus follow-on; Senate proceeded committee-by-committee.","statusDate":"2024-05-15","url":"https://www.schumer.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Roadmap_Electronic1.32pm.pdf","summary":"31-page roadmap out of the 2023 Insight Forums recommending at least $32B/year in non-defense AI R&D funding, workforce training, and rolling consideration of smaller AI bills by committees rather than a single comprehensive framework."},{"id":"us-take-it-down","name":"TAKE IT DOWN Act (S.146, 119th Congress)","shortName":"TAKE IT DOWN Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Congress","status":"Enacted. Signed May 19, 2025 after near-unanimous Senate passage and a 409–2 House vote (Apr 28, 2025); platform notice-and-removal obligations took effect May 19, 2026.","statusDate":"2025-05-19","url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/146","summary":"Cruz-Klobuchar law criminalizing knowing publication of nonconsensual intimate imagery, explicitly including AI-generated deepfakes, and requiring covered platforms to remove reported imagery within 48 hours of a valid request, with FTC enforcement. First major federal statute directly addressing AI-generated content harms."},{"id":"us-copied-act","name":"Content Origin Protection and Integrity from Edited and Deepfaked Media Act (COPIED Act, S.1396, 119th Congress)","shortName":"COPIED Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Senate","status":"Introduced Apr 9, 2025 by Cantwell, Blackburn, Heinrich; referred to Senate Commerce with no further action as of July 2026. First introduced as S.4674 in July 2024 (118th).","statusDate":"2025-04-09","url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/1396","summary":"Directs NIST standards for content provenance, watermarking, and synthetic-content detection; prohibits stripping provenance information; and bars using provenance-marked copyrighted works to train AI or generate content without the owner's consent. Enforced by FTC and state AGs, with a private right of action for content owners."},{"id":"us-train-act","name":"Transparency and Responsibility for Artificial Intelligence Networks Act (TRAIN Act, S.2455, 119th Congress)","shortName":"TRAIN Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Senate","status":"Reintroduced Jul 24, 2025 by Welch with Blackburn, Schiff, Hawley; referred to Senate Judiciary, no committee action as of July 2026. House companion introduced by Reps. Dean and Moran in Jan 2026. Original version S.5379 (Nov 2024, 118th).","statusDate":"2025-07-24","url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/2455","summary":"Creates an administrative subpoena process (modeled on DMCA piracy subpoenas) letting copyright owners with a good-faith belief obtain AI developers' training records to learn whether their works were used to train generative models; failure to comply creates a rebuttable presumption that the developer copied the work."},{"id":"us-create-ai","name":"CREATE AI Act (S.4441 / H.R.2385, 119th Congress)","shortName":"CREATE AI Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Congress","status":"Senate version reintroduced Apr 29, 2026 (Young, Heinrich, Rounds, Booker), pending in Senate Commerce; House companion H.R.2385 (Obernolte/Beyer, introduced Mar 26, 2025) was ordered reported by committee on June 25, 2026. A 118th-Congress version (S.2714) cleared Senate Commerce in 2024 but died.","statusDate":"2026-06-25","url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/4441","summary":"Codifies the National AI Research Resource (NAIRR) to give universities, researchers, and startups shared access to compute, datasets, and models. One of the few bipartisan AI bills actively moving in mid-2026."},{"id":"us-sandbox-act","name":"Strengthening Artificial intelligence Normalization and Diffusion By Oversight and eXperimentation Act (SANDBOX Act, S.2750, 119th Congress)","shortName":"SANDBOX Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Senate","status":"Introduced Sept 10, 2025 by Commerce Chair Cruz as the first plank of his AI policy framework; referred to Senate Commerce, no committee action as of July 2026.","statusDate":"2025-09-10","url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/2750","summary":"Creates an OSTP-coordinated federal regulatory sandbox in which AI developers and deployers can apply to waive or modify federal regulations that impede AI development, with renewable waivers running up to a decade and reporting back to Congress. Framed as implementing the July 2025 White House AI Action Plan."},{"id":"us-ai-risk-eval-act","name":"Artificial Intelligence Risk Evaluation Act of 2025 (S.2938, 119th Congress)","shortName":"AI Risk Evaluation Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Senate","status":"Introduced Sept 29, 2025 by Hawley and Blumenthal; referred to Senate Commerce, no committee action as of July 2026.","statusDate":"2025-09-29","url":"https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/2938","summary":"Requires developers of advanced AI systems to submit them to a Department of Energy-run evaluation program testing for loss-of-control and weaponization risks before deployment, with penalties for noncompliance, and tasks DOE with generating data to inform a future federal oversight framework."},{"id":"us-great-american-ai-act","name":"Great American Artificial Intelligence Act (discussion draft, 119th Congress)","shortName":"Great American AI Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US House","status":"Bipartisan discussion draft released June 4, 2026 by Reps. Obernolte and Trahan (joined by Franklin, Subramanyam, Houchin, Peters); open for stakeholder feedback, not formally introduced as of July 2026; the preemption title has drawn opposition including from House Democrats and consumer groups.","statusDate":"2026-06-04","url":"https://obernolte.house.gov/media/press-releases/obernolte-trahan-release-discussion-draft-great-american-ai-act","summary":"First comprehensive federal AI framework draft in Congress: safety, transparency, and accountability obligations for the largest frontier developers, paired with a three-year preemption of state laws that specifically regulate AI model development (states retain authority over AI use)."},{"id":"us-ca-ab2013","name":"California AB 2013 — Generative AI: Training Data Transparency","shortName":"CA AB 2013","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"California State Legislature","status":"Enacted (chaptered Sep 28, 2024); operative Jan 1, 2026. xAI constitutional challenge pending on appeal in the Ninth Circuit after denial of a preliminary injunction.","statusDate":"2026-01-01","url":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240AB2013","summary":"Requires developers of generative AI systems made available to Californians (covering systems released since January 1, 2022) to publish, before release or substantial modification, a high-level summary of training datasets: sources, number and types of data points, copyright/IP status, whether data was purchased or licensed, and whether personal information was included. Exemptions for security, aircraft-operation, and federal national-security systems."},{"id":"us-ca-sb942","name":"California SB 942 — California AI Transparency Act (as amended by AB 853)","shortName":"CA SB 942 / AB 853","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"California State Legislature","status":"Enacted Sep 2024; AB 853 (signed Oct 13, 2025) delayed core covered-provider obligations to Aug 2, 2026 and added platform duties from Jan 1, 2027 and capture-device duties from Jan 1, 2028.","statusDate":"2025-10-13","url":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB942","summary":"Requires large generative-AI providers to offer free AI-detection tools and to embed manifest and latent provenance disclosures in AI-generated content. AB 853 amendments pushed the operative date from Jan 1, 2026 to Aug 2, 2026, expressly to align with EU AI Act Article 50 provenance timelines, and extended obligations to large online platforms and GenAI hosting platforms from Jan 1, 2027, and to capture-device makers from Jan 1, 2028."},{"id":"us-ca-sb243","name":"California SB 243 — Companion Chatbots","shortName":"CA SB 243","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"California State Legislature","status":"Signed Oct 13, 2025; in effect since Jan 1, 2026.","statusDate":"2026-01-01","url":"https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202520260SB243","summary":"First state law specifically regulating companion chatbots: operators must disclose users are talking to an AI, maintain protocols addressing suicidal ideation and self-harm content, take reasonable measures to keep minors from sexually explicit content, and file annual reports. Includes a private right of action."},{"id":"us-co-sb189-admt","name":"Colorado SB 26-189 — Automated Decision-Making Technology (repeal-and-reenact of the Colorado AI Act)","shortName":"CO SB 26-189","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"Colorado General Assembly","status":"Signed May 14, 2026; act effective Aug 12, 2026; substantive obligations and AG rules due Jan 1, 2027.","statusDate":"2026-05-14","url":"https://leg.colorado.gov/bills/sb26-189","summary":"Repeals and reenacts Colorado's SB 24-205 framework, replacing risk-tier 'high-risk AI' duties (impact assessments, algorithmic-discrimination duty of care) with transparency-centered rules for automated decision-making technology in consequential decisions: developer technical documentation to deployers, consumer notice, plain-language adverse-decision explanations and human-review rights, AG-only enforcement with a 60-day cure period (sunsetting after three years). Passed after a federal court suspended enforcement of SB 24-205 in xAI's lawsuit joined by DOJ."},{"id":"us-ut-ai-policy-act","name":"Utah SB 149 (2024) — Artificial Intelligence Policy Act","shortName":"Utah AI Policy Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"Utah State Legislature","status":"In force since May 1, 2024; amended effective May 7, 2025 (SB 226 narrowed disclosure duties; SB 332 extended sunset to Jul 1, 2027).","statusDate":"2025-05-07","url":"https://le.utah.gov/~2024/bills/static/SB0149.html","summary":"First state AI-focused consumer-protection statute: generative AI use is no defense to consumer-protection violations; disclosure that a consumer is interacting with AI, narrowed by SB 226 (2025) to disclosure on request or in 'high-risk' interactions, with a safe harbor if the chatbot self-discloses. Created the Office of Artificial Intelligence Policy and a regulatory-mitigation 'learning lab.'"},{"id":"us-tx-traiga","name":"Texas HB 149 — Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TRAIGA)","shortName":"TX TRAIGA","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"Texas Legislature (89th)","status":"Signed Jun 22, 2025; in effect since Jan 1, 2026.","statusDate":"2026-01-01","url":"https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=89R&Bill=HB149","summary":"As introduced it mirrored Colorado's high-risk/algorithmic-discrimination framework; the enacted version was pared back to intent-based prohibitions (AI developed/deployed to incite self-harm or crime, unlawfully discriminate with intent, produce CSAM, social scoring and biometric identification by government), disclosure duties for government agencies using AI, an AG-enforced regime with a 60-day cure period, and an AI regulatory sandbox plus an AI advisory council."},{"id":"us-il-hb3773","name":"Illinois HB 3773 (2024) — Human Rights Act amendments on AI in employment","shortName":"IL HB 3773","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"Illinois General Assembly (103rd)","status":"Signed Aug 9, 2024 (P.A. 103-0804); in effect since Jan 1, 2026; IDHR implementing rules (draft 'Subpart J') in progress.","statusDate":"2026-01-01","url":"https://natlawreview.com/article/illinois-anti-discrimination-law-address-ai-goes-effect-1-january-2026","summary":"Amends the Illinois Human Rights Act to prohibit employers from using AI that has the effect of discriminating on the basis of protected classes across recruitment, hiring, promotion, discipline, discharge and terms of employment; bars use of zip code as a proxy for protected class; requires notice to employees and applicants when AI is used in covered employment decisions."},{"id":"us-tn-elvis","name":"Tennessee ELVIS Act — Ensuring Likeness Voice and Image Security Act (2024)","shortName":"TN ELVIS Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"Tennessee General Assembly (113th)","status":"Signed Mar 21, 2024; in force since Jul 1, 2024.","statusDate":"2024-07-01","url":"https://www.tn.gov/governor/news/2024/3/21/photos--gov--lee-signs-elvis-act-into-law.html","summary":"First state law updating right-of-publicity protections for the AI era: adds 'voice' to Tennessee's Protection of Personal Rights law and creates liability for unauthorized AI voice cloning and deepfakes of performers, including distributing tools whose primary purpose is unauthorized replication. Backed by RIAA, the Recording Academy, ASCAP, BMI, ACM and SAG-AFTRA; became a template for likeness bills in other states and for the federal NO FAKES debate."},{"id":"us-ny-loading","name":"New York S7543A — Legislative Oversight of Automated Decision-making in Government (LOADinG) Act","shortName":"NY LOADinG Act","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"US-state","legislature":"New York State Legislature","status":"Signed Dec 21, 2024.","statusDate":"2024-12-21","url":"https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/bills/2023/S7543/amendment/A","summary":"Regulates state-agency use of automated decision-making: public disclosure of automated decision systems in use, impact assessments before deployment and biennially, meaningful human review of consequential decisions, and limits on displacing state workers with automation. Sponsored by Sen. Kristen Gonzalez and Asm. Steven Otis; strongly backed by public-sector unions and the NYS AFL-CIO."},{"id":"eu-aild","name":"AI Liability Directive (COM(2022) 496)","shortName":"AI Liability Directive","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"EU","legislature":"European Parliament & Council of the EU (ordinary legislative procedure)","status":"Withdrawn. Commission announced withdrawal in its 2025 work programme (11 Feb 2025), citing 'no foreseeable agreement'; formally withdrawn via OJ C/2025/5423 of 6 October 2025. No replacement proposal as of July 2026.","statusDate":"2025-10-06","url":"https://www.europarl.europa.eu/legislative-train/theme-a-europe-fit-for-the-digital-age/file-ai-liability-directive","summary":"Proposed 28 Sep 2022 to ease compensation claims for AI-caused harm via a rebuttable presumption of causality and evidence-disclosure duties. Parliament's IMCO committee called adoption 'premature and unnecessary' (May 2025 opinion); JURI work was still under way when the Commission pulled the file. BEUC, CDT Europe, Mozilla and others urged the Commission to begin work on replacement AI liability rules (7 Apr 2025)."},{"id":"eu-gpai-guidelines","name":"Commission Guidelines on the scope of the obligations for providers of general-purpose AI models (AI Act Art. 53/55)","shortName":"GPAI Guidelines","kind":"rulemaking","jurisdiction":"EU","legislature":"European Commission (AI Office)","status":"Published 18 July 2025; non-binding but states the Commission's enforcement interpretation. Applied alongside GPAI obligations from 2 Aug 2025; Commission fining powers activate 2 Aug 2026; pre-Aug-2025 models must comply by 2 Aug 2027.","statusDate":"2025-07-18","url":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/policies/guidelines-gpai-providers","summary":"Clarifies which models count as GPAI, the compute-threshold-based 'systemic risk' presumption, when downstream modifiers become 'providers', exemptions for open-source models, and the Commission's enforcement approach. Complements the voluntary GPAI Code of Practice."},{"id":"eu-art53-template","name":"Explanatory Notice and Template for the Public Summary of Training Content for general-purpose AI models (AI Act Art. 53(1)(d))","shortName":"Art. 53 training-data template","kind":"rulemaking","jurisdiction":"EU","legislature":"European Commission (AI Office)","status":"Adopted and published 24 July 2025; mandatory format for the public training-content summaries GPAI providers must publish from 2 Aug 2025 (models already on the market have until 2 Aug 2027).","statusDate":"2025-07-24","url":"https://digital-strategy.ec.europa.eu/en/library/explanatory-notice-and-template-public-summary-training-content-general-purpose-ai-models","summary":"Sets a 'common minimal baseline' for disclosing what data trained a GPAI model: overview of sources, main large datasets, and top domain names crawled, so parties with legitimate interests (incl. rightsholders) can exercise their rights; fines up to EUR 15m or 3% of global turnover. A coalition of 40 creative-sector organisations called the template and wider GPAI package 'a betrayal of the EU AI Act's objectives' (30 Jul 2025)."},{"id":"eu-ai-standards-request","name":"CEN-CENELEC JTC 21 harmonised standards for the AI Act (standardisation request M/593, amended by M/613)","shortName":"AI Act harmonised standards","kind":"rulemaking","jurisdiction":"EU","legislature":"CEN-CENELEC JTC 21 under European Commission standardisation request","status":"Delayed; original 30 Apr 2025 deadline missed. On 23 Oct 2025 CEN and CENELEC adopted an exceptional acceleration package (direct publication after positive Enquiry vote, dedicated drafting group for six delayed drafts) targeting delivery of key standards by Q4 2026. In May 2026 the first two fundamental standards, EN 18228 (AI risk management) and EN 18282 (cybersecurity specifications for AI systems), entered Public Enquiry.","statusDate":"2026-05-08","url":"https://www.cencenelec.eu/news-events/news/2025/brief-news/2025-10-23-ai-standardization/","summary":"The technical standards high-risk AI providers need for presumption of conformity under the AI Act. Their slippage past the original Aug 2026 high-risk application date was the Commission's stated core rationale for the Digital Omnibus deferral of high-risk obligations to Dec 2027/Aug 2028."},{"id":"uk-ai-whitepaper-2023","name":"AI regulation: a pro-innovation approach (UK white paper)","shortName":"UK AI White Paper 2023","kind":"consultation","jurisdiction":"UK","legislature":"UK Government (DSIT)","status":"Concluded. White paper published 29 Mar 2023 proposing five cross-sectoral principles applied by existing regulators on a non-statutory basis; consultation ran to 21 Jun 2023; government response 6 Feb 2024 kept the non-statutory, context-based approach while conceding future binding requirements on highly capable general-purpose systems may be needed.","statusDate":"2024-02-06","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ai-regulation-a-pro-innovation-approach","summary":"The UK's foundational choice not to legislate on AI: sector regulators apply five principles (safety, transparency, fairness, accountability, contestability) without new statutory powers. The Feb 2024 consultation response maintained this framework, making the UK's approach the counterpoint to the EU AI Act and the reference point for every subsequent fight over a UK AI bill."},{"id":"uk-bletchley-summit","name":"AI Safety Summit 2023 — Bletchley Declaration (and Seoul follow-up)","shortName":"Bletchley Declaration","kind":"report","jurisdiction":"UK","legislature":"UK Government (DSIT)","status":"Concluded. Declaration signed by 28 countries and the EU at Bletchley Park 1–2 Nov 2023; UK AI Safety Institute launched alongside (renamed AI Security Institute Feb 2025); Seoul follow-up summit 21–22 May 2024 produced voluntary Frontier AI Safety Commitments from 16 companies.","statusDate":"2024-05-21","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ai-safety-summit-2023-the-bletchley-declaration","summary":"The UK-convened international track on frontier-model risk: a joint declaration on frontier AI risks, creation of the state testing body (AISI/AI Security Institute), and voluntary company commitments at Seoul in lieu of binding obligations."},{"id":"uk-frontier-ai-bill","name":"Promised UK frontier AI bill (never introduced)","shortName":"UK AI Bill (promised)","kind":"bill","jurisdiction":"UK","legislature":"UK Parliament","status":"Not introduced as of Jul 2026. Labour's 2024 manifesto promised binding regulation on developers of the most powerful models; the Jul 2024 King's Speech said government would 'seek to establish' such legislation; introduction was repeatedly deferred through 2025; the May 2026 King's Speech contained no AI bill, with AI instead threaded through other bills (e.g. cross-economy regulatory sandbox powers in a Regulating for Growth bill).","statusDate":"2026-05-14","url":"https://iapp.org/news/a/king-s-speech-signals-diffuse-uk-digital-policy-agenda-but-no-ai-bill","summary":"The vehicle that never arrived: binding statutory duties on frontier-model developers, promised since 2024 and repeatedly delayed, leaving AISI testing and the 2023 non-statutory framework as the UK regime. Its absence from the May 2026 King's Speech is the current status; civil society (Ada Lovelace) presses for it, industry has favoured the status quo."},{"id":"uk-ai-action-plan","name":"AI Opportunities Action Plan","shortName":"UK AI Opportunities Action Plan","kind":"report","jurisdiction":"UK","legislature":"UK Government (DSIT)","status":"Adopted. Matt Clifford's 50-recommendation plan published 13 Jan 2025 with government accepting the recommendations, including AI Growth Zones (first at Culham), a 20x compute expansion ambition, and a National Data Library; rollout ongoing through 2025–26.","statusDate":"2025-01-13","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/ai-opportunities-action-plan/ai-opportunities-action-plan","summary":"The growth-first turn in UK AI policy: infrastructure (AI Growth Zones), compute, data access and adoption, with regulation framed as an enabler of investment. Cited by AI developers (Google, OpenAI) in copyright filings as evidence the UK should choose permissive training rules."},{"id":"uk-copyright-ai-report-2026","name":"Report on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence (s.136 DUA Act statutory report)","shortName":"UK Copyright & AI Report 2026","kind":"report","jurisdiction":"UK","legislature":"UK Government (DSIT/IPO/DCMS)","status":"Published 18 Mar 2026 with the economic impact assessment, meeting the 9-month statutory deadline. Government adopted none of the four consultation options: it recognised 'strong opposition to the opt-out exception', did not take forward a broad TDM exception, left existing copyright law unchanged, and floated 'more targeted interventions' plus further work on input/output transparency, technical standards, licensing, enforcement, computer-generated works and digital replicas.","statusDate":"2026-03-18","url":"https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/report-and-impact-assessment-on-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence/report-on-copyright-and-artificial-intelligence","summary":"The statutory endpoint of the Dec 2024–Feb 2025 consultation (11,500+ responses) forced by the DUA Act ping-pong: the opt-out TDM exception is shelved, a broad exception ruled out for now, and no legislation proposed, a status-quo holding position with future 'targeted interventions' signalled, including a dedicated workstream on digital replicas."},{"id":"uk-lords-llm-inquiry","name":"House of Lords Communications and Digital Committee inquiry: Large language models and generative AI","shortName":"Lords LLM inquiry","kind":"inquiry","jurisdiction":"UK","legislature":"House of Lords","status":"Concluded. Report published 2 Feb 2024 warning against regulatory capture by incumbents, urging support for open competition, rebalancing toward market oversight alongside safety, and stating the government could not 'sit on its hands' while LLM developers exploited rightsholders' works; government response spring 2024.","statusDate":"2024-02-02","url":"https://committees.parliament.uk/work/7827/large-language-models/","summary":"The Lords' major LLM review: pro-competition and innovation-friendly overall, but explicitly sided with rightsholders on training-data copyright and pressed government to resolve the dispute."},{"id":"uk-commons-ai-governance-inquiry","name":"House of Commons Science, Innovation and Technology Committee inquiry: Governance of artificial intelligence","shortName":"Commons AI governance inquiry","kind":"inquiry","jurisdiction":"UK","legislature":"House of Commons","status":"Concluded. Interim report Aug 2023 set out 'twelve challenges of AI governance' (including IP, transparency and liability); final report May 2024 urged the next government to be ready to legislate if regulator gaps emerged. In 2025 the successor committee obtained and published Google's and OpenAI's copyright-consultation responses.","statusDate":"2024-05-28","url":"https://committees.parliament.uk/work/6986/governance-of-artificial-intelligence-ai/","summary":"The Commons' cross-cutting AI governance inquiry (2022–24): catalogued the gaps in the non-statutory approach, pressed for legislative readiness, and later forced transparency on the big developers' UK copyright lobbying by publishing their consultation submissions."},{"id":"us-usco-ai-study","name":"US Copyright Office 'Copyright and Artificial Intelligence' study (NOI Docket 2023-6 and Report Parts 1-3)","shortName":"USCO AI Study & Reports","kind":"inquiry","jurisdiction":"US","legislature":"US Copyright Office / Library of Congress","status":"Part 1 (Digital Replicas) final July 31, 2024; Part 2 (Copyrightability) final Jan 29, 2025; Part 3 (Generative AI Training) issued in pre-publication form May 9, 2025 and still not final as of July 2026. Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter was removed May 10, 2025 but restored to office by a D.C. Circuit panel order of September 10, 2025 in Perlmutter v. Blanche; the Supreme Court declined to stay that order on June 30, 2026, she continues to serve while the litigation proceeds.","statusDate":"2026-06-30","url":"https://www.copyright.gov/ai/","summary":"The Copyright Office's August 2023 Notice of Inquiry (Docket 2023-6, ~10,000 comments) and resulting three-part report. Part 1 recommends a federal digital-replica right; Part 3 (pre-publication) concludes that generative AI training is not categorically fair use, that market dilution weighs against fair use, and that voluntary licensing markets should be allowed to develop."}]}