US States / Cities — AI-related Legislation
US States · AI Legislation Activity
Colored by approximate count of AI bills introduced and enacted in 2024–2025 (NCSL / IAPP basis). Click a state with a dedicated page for details.
Flagship law
Observations
- California, Texas, Colorado, and New York lead on both volume and substance; all four have 2026-applicable comprehensive AI statutes.
- Red-state (Texas) + blue-state (California / Colorado) convergence on AI legislation cross-cuts ideology — a rare cross-partisan regulatory moment.
- The Mountain West + Plains states cluster at bucket 0–1: low legislative density despite some introduced bills. Federal EO 14365 (Dec 2025) targets the high-bucket states for preemption.
Overview
Section titled “Overview”At the federal level the United States still has no comprehensive AI legislation (and EO 14179 pushed further in a deregulatory direction); the hard-law main theatre of AI governance is at the state level.
The 2025 legislative session: 1,208 state AI bills were introduced nationwide, 145 enacted (IAPP / NCSL statistics). Several comprehensive state AI laws enter their effective phase in 2026 (Colorado, California SB 53, Texas TRAIGA).
Trump EO 14365 (2025-12-11): the federal government launched a preemption offensive against state AI laws, but the legal profession generally considers that an executive order cannot independently preempt state law; in the near term, state AI laws continue to take effect.
Collected (three comprehensive state laws + one municipal law)
Section titled “Collected (three comprehensive state laws + one municipal law)”State laws (comprehensive AI)
Section titled “State laws (comprehensive AI)”- Colorado AI Act (SB24-205) — effective 2026-06-30 (postponed by 2025 amendments) · the first US comprehensive state AI anti-discrimination law, structurally closest to the EU AI Act.
- California SB 53 (Transparency in Frontier AI Act) — effective 2026-01-01 · the first US state law specifically targeting frontier AI, with a 10²⁶ FLOP compute threshold.
- Texas TRAIGA (HB 149) — effective 2026-01-01 · the Republican-led version of a comprehensive AI law, focused on prohibiting harmful uses + preempting local ordinances.
Municipal law (sector-specific)
Section titled “Municipal law (sector-specific)”- NYC Local Law 144 (AEDT) — enforcement began 2023-07-05 · the first US law with concrete compliance requirements for AI hiring tools.
Comparison of the three comprehensive state laws
Section titled “Comparison of the three comprehensive state laws”| Dimension | Colorado AI Act | California SB 53 | Texas TRAIGA |
|---|---|---|---|
| Positioning | Anti-discrimination / high-risk AI | Frontier AI transparency | Prohibition of specific harmful uses |
| Covered entities | Developer + Deployer | Large frontier developers with annual revenue ≥ $500M | All entities |
| Compliance burden | High | Medium | Low |
| Penalties | Per CPA | $1M / violation | $10K-$200K / violation |
| Party lead | Democratic Party | Democratic Party | Republican Party |
| Preemption of local ordinances | — | — | Explicitly preempts cities and counties |
Relation to the federal level (state of play as of 2026-04)
Section titled “Relation to the federal level (state of play as of 2026-04)”- Federal deregulation + state-level regulatory resistance: the Trump administration pushes preemption; state AGs push back.
- EO 14365 litigation threat: DOJ’s AI Litigation Task Force is expected to bring challenges to California / Colorado in 2026-Q1/Q2.
- Practical takeaway: firms should continue to comply with existing state laws in the near term and await federal-court rulings over the medium term.
- Large-state demonstration effect: the legislation of California / Colorado / Texas / Illinois / New York is frequently drawn on by subsequent states (across the ideological spectrum).