HomeAI LawsMinnesotaInver Grove Heights

AI Laws in Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota

As of 2026-08-12, AI Laws USA tracks 23 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota: 10+ federal protections, 12 Minnesota state-level rules, and 1 local Inver Grove Heights ordinance. Coverage is strongest on data-center siting and energy, consumer data privacy, government use of AI, and AI disclosure and transparency. 9 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.

Inver Grove Heights local AI rules (and Dakota County)

1 local AI rule specific to Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota or Dakota County.

  1. In effect Limited protection

    One-year moratorium on data center development (Inver Grove Heights MN)

    Inver Grove Heights · Effective 2026-06-26 · Inver Grove Heights interim moratorium ordinance on data centers (June 26, 2026)

    Inver Grove Heights City Council voted 3-2 on June 26, 2026 to approve a one-year interim moratorium on new data center development while the city studies zoning, infrastructure, and land-use impacts. The vote came after a developer with a pending proposal at the former Travel Tags property on Carmen Avenue threatened more than $150 million in damages if the moratorium passed.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

Minnesota-level AI rules most relevant to Inver Grove Heights

12 Minnesota state rules apply to residents and businesses in Inver Grove Heights. Showing the 8 most relevant to Inver Grove Heights's local picture; 4 more are on the Minnesota jurisdiction page.

  1. In effect Limited protection

    Minnesota State systemwide Generative AI guidance and approv

    Minnesota State (Minnesota State Colleges and Universities) · Effective 2025-07-03 · Minnesota State systemwide Generative AI guidance and approved-tools policy

    Minnesota State issues systemwide generative-AI guidance authorizing secured tools like Microsoft Copilot, blocking services such as Otter.AI and Fireflies.AI for security, and ensuring system data is not used to train external AI models.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  2. In effect Limited protection

    Public Artificial Intelligence Services Security Standard

    Minnesota · Effective 2024-01-01 · Public Artificial Intelligence Services Security Standard

    Minnesota IT Services set a security standard governing state employees' use of public AI services (such as ChatGPT), restricting inputs to public/low-classification data and setting guardrails to prevent breaches of private or sensitive information.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  3. Proposed / pending Proposed or pending

    SF4203

    MN · MN SF4203 (94th Legislature 2025-2026)

    Exemption of data centers modification for sales and use tax

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  4. Proposed / pending Proposed or pending

    SF5231

    MN · MN SF5231 (94th Legislature 2025-2026)

    Data centers tax exemption repeal; contingent reduction in special education aid appropriation repeal

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  5. Proposed / pending Proposed or pending

    HF5125

    MN · MN HF5125 (94th Legislature 2025-2026)

    Data centers sales and use tax exemption repealed, and contingent reduction in special education aid appropriations repealed.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  6. In effect Moderate protection

    MN drone-warrant law (2020)

    Minnesota · Effective 2020-08-01 · Minn. Stat. § 626.19

    Minnesota requires police to get a search warrant before using a drone, with narrow exceptions, and to publish an annual public report listing every drone deployment, purpose, and cost. The annual transparency requirement is among the strongest in any state drone law.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  7. In effect Limited protection

    Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act

    Minnesota · Effective 2025-07-31 · 2024 Minn. Laws ch. 123 (HF 4757); Minn. Stat. §§ 325M.01–.21

    Minnesota's privacy law gives residents data rights plus something unique: the right to question automated profiling decisions with significant effects — including the right to know why the decision was made and what would change the outcome. Full AG enforcement began February 2026.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  8. In effect Limited protection

    Attorney General Ellison releases consumer alert on DHS' digital surveillance an

    MN · Effective 2026-01-15 · Attorney General Ellison releases consumer alert on DHS' digital surveillance and how to protect your privacy (2026-01-15)

    Ellison alert and online reporting tool warn residents about AI-powered ID/tracking using biometric, app, and vehicle data; recommends disabling FaceID/TouchID. Follows expert filings in Kohls v. Ellison deepfake case.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

See all 12 Minnesota AI rules →

Federal AI rules that apply in Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota

These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota. Showing the 10 strongest and most recent.

  1. In effect Stronger protection

    Bartz v. Anthropic

    N.D. Cal. · Effective 2025-09-05 · Bartz v. Anthropic PBC, No. 3:24-cv-05417 (N.D. Cal.)

    Authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson sued Anthropic over its use of pirated-book datasets to train Claude. In June 2025 Judge William Alsup ruled that training on lawfully purchased books was fair use. The piracy claims (LibGen ingestion) proceeded toward settlement; in September 2025 Anthropic agreed to a $1.5 billion class settlement covering ~500,000 works. Judge Alsup granted preliminary approval September 25, 2025 and final approval July 20, 2026. The appeal period runs through August 19, 2026; class members will not receive payments until at least end of 2026.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  2. In effect Stronger protection

    Benavides v. Tesla (Autopilot)

    S.D. Fla. · Effective 2025-08-01 · Benavides v. Tesla, Inc., No. 1:21-cv-21940 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 1, 2025)

    A Florida federal jury found Tesla 33% liable in August 2025 for the 2019 death of Naibel Benavides Leon, in a crash involving Autopilot. The jury awarded $243M ($129M compensatory + $200M punitive); in February 2026 the court denied Tesla's post-trial motions and upheld the verdict in full — the first Autopilot wrongful-death verdict against Tesla.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  3. In effect Stronger protection

    COPPA + 2025 Rule (childrens data)

    United States · Effective 2025-06-23 · 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501–6506; 16 C.F.R. Part 312

    COPPA requires online services aimed at children under 13 to get verifiable parental consent before collecting kids' personal data. The 2025 rule update — fully in effect since April 22, 2026 — adds biometric identifiers (like face templates and voiceprints, which matter for AI tools), requires separate parental consent before sharing children's data for targeted advertising, and tightens data retention limits.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  4. In effect Stronger protection

    TAKE IT DOWN Act

    United States · Effective 2025-05-19 · Pub. L. No. 119-12 (S. 146)

    Makes it a federal crime to knowingly publish intimate images of someone without consent, including AI-generated deepfakes. Social media and similar platforms must give victims a way to request removal and must take the content (and known copies) down within 48 hours. The platform removal requirement became enforceable May 19, 2026, and the FTC has already begun enforcement.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  5. Blocked / in litigation Stronger protection

    NetChoice v. Yost (Ohio)

    S.D. Ohio · Effective 2025-04-16 · NetChoice, LLC v. Yost, No. 2:24-cv-00047 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 16, 2025)

    Ohio's Social Media Parental Notification Act — requiring parental consent for minors' social-media use, including algorithmic feeds — was preliminarily enjoined on February 12, 2024, then permanently enjoined on April 16, 2025 when the district court granted summary judgment for NetChoice. The state appealed to the Sixth Circuit, which vacated the district court's injunction in 2026.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  6. In effect Stronger protection

    Thaler v. Perlmutter (Copyright)

    D.C. Cir. · Effective 2025-03-18 · Thaler v. Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 2025)

    The companion copyright case: Stephen Thaler sought to register a copyright with 'Creativity Machine' (his AI) as the author. The D.C. Circuit affirmed in March 2025 that the Copyright Act's human-authorship requirement is dispositive as a matter of statutory law. AI cannot be a copyright author under U.S. law.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  7. In effect Stronger protection

    Thomson Reuters v. Ross

    D. Del. · Effective 2025-02-11 · Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH v. Ross Intelligence, Inc., No. 1:20-cv-00613 (D. Del. Feb. 11, 2025)

    Thomson Reuters sued legal-research startup Ross Intelligence in 2020 for copying Westlaw headnotes to train a competing AI legal-research tool. In February 2025, Judge Stephanos Bibas (sitting by designation) granted summary judgment to Thomson Reuters on direct copyright infringement and rejected Ross's fair-use defense — the first definitive U.S. ruling on AI-training fair use. No jury trial occurred: a 2023 opinion had denied summary judgment and pointed toward trial, but the court invited renewed briefing and reversed course in the 2025 ruling.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  8. In effect Stronger protection

    Louis v. SafeRent

    D. Mass. · Effective 2024-11-20 · Louis v. SafeRent Solutions, LLC, No. 1:22-cv-10800 (D. Mass.)

    SafeRent agreed in November 2024 to a $2.275M settlement and a five-year ban on using its 'SafeRent Score' for housing-voucher applicants, after a class action alleged its AI tenant-screening tool systematically denied housing to Black and Hispanic Section 8 voucher holders. The first major AI tenant-screening Fair Housing Act settlement.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  9. In effect Stronger protection

    FTC Impersonation Rule (AI)

    United States · Effective 2024-04-01 · 16 C.F.R. Part 461; 89 Fed. Reg. 15017

    The FTC's Impersonation Rule lets the agency directly sue scammers who pretend to be a government agency or a real business — including those who use AI-cloned voices or generated images to do so. Civil penalties can reach $53,088 per violation. The FTC also issued a supplemental notice in February 2024 proposing to extend the rule to all individual impersonation.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  10. In effect Stronger protection

    TCPA (AI voice calls)

    United States · Effective 2024-02-08 · 47 U.S.C. § 227; FCC 24-17

    Robocalls using AI-cloned or AI-generated voices are treated like other 'artificial voice' calls: callers need your prior express consent, must identify themselves, and must offer opt-outs for telemarketing. You can personally sue violators for $500 to $1,500 per illegal call.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

See all federal AI rules →

Frequently asked questions about AI laws in Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota

Are there AI laws in Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota?
Yes. We index 1 local AI rule that specifically apply in Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota, including One-year moratorium on data center development (Inver Grove Heights MN). On top of that, 12 Minnesota state-level rules and 10+ federal AI protections apply throughout the city.
What federal AI rules apply in Inver Grove Heights?
Every federal AI protection in our index applies in Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota. The highest-strength federal rules currently include Bartz v. Anthropic, Benavides v. Tesla (Autopilot), COPPA + 2025 Rule (childrens data). 10+ federal entries are tracked in total.
Does Minnesota have an AI privacy law?
Minnesota has 6 privacy- or automated-decision-related AI rules in our index, including MN drone-warrant law (2020) and Attorney General Ellison releases consumer alert on DHS' digital surveillance an. These apply to residents of Inver Grove Heights.
Are deepfakes illegal in Minnesota?
Minnesota has 3 deepfake- or AI-image-related laws in our index, including MN HF 1370 (partially enjoined) and MN Deepfake Law. Additionally, the federal TAKE IT DOWN Act covers non-consensual intimate-image deepfakes nationwide.
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Inver Grove Heights?
Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota has no AI-employment-screening-specific rule in our index. Federal Title VII, ADA, and EEOC guidance still apply, plus any general Minnesota anti-discrimination statutes.
How do I report an AI law violation in Inver Grove Heights?
Most AI rules are enforced by an agency listed on each individual entry. For Minnesota state laws, the Minnesota Attorney General's office is the usual starting point. For federal AI rules, file complaints with the relevant federal agency (FTC, EEOC, HUD, CFPB, etc.) named on each protection entry. We also accept tips at feedback@ailawsusa.com.
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Inver Grove Heights?
Facial-recognition use in Inver Grove Heights, Minnesota is addressed by Attorney General Ellison releases consumer alert on DHS' digital surveillance an. See those entries for what is allowed, who must comply, and enforcement details.
Is Inver Grove Heights regulated by Minnesota's consumer privacy act?
Yes. Minnesota state laws apply uniformly to residents and businesses operating in Inver Grove Heights. See the Minnesota jurisdiction page for the complete list of consumer-protection and privacy rules.

Have we missed an AI rule in Inver Grove Heights?

This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Inver Grove Heights ordinance, county rule, or local enforcement action we should add, email feedback@ailawsusa.com or submit a correction. Every entry must include a verifiable source.