AI Laws in Johnson City, Tennessee
AI Laws USA tracks 22 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Johnson City, Tennessee: 10+ federal rules, 11 Tennessee state-level rules, and 1 local Johnson City ordinance. Coverage is strongest on consumer protection, consumer data privacy, government use of AI, and automated decision-making. 12 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
Johnson City local AI rules (and Washington County)
1 local AI rule specific to Johnson City, Tennessee or Washington County.
-
In effect Strength: moderate
Johnson City Data Center Moratorium
Johnson City, TN · Effective June 5, 2025 · Johnson City, Tenn., Commission data center moratorium (adopted June 5, 2025; extended May 22, 2026 to Dec. 3, 2026)
Johnson City, Tennessee passed a one-year moratorium on data center construction on June 5, 2025, applying to land use applications and building permits for new data centers in the I-2 heavy industrial district. A companion text amendment limits data centers to the I-2 district. The Commission voted unanimously on May 22, 2026 to extend the moratorium to December 3, 2026, giving the city more time to study noise and other impacts and develop permanent regulations. The local utility BrightRidge also imposed a separate moratorium on data center project proposals in the region.
Tennessee-level AI rules most relevant to Johnson City
11 Tennessee state rules apply to residents and businesses in Johnson City. Showing the 8 most relevant to Johnson City's local picture; 3 more are on the Tennessee jurisdiction page.
-
In effect Strength: limited
TN SB 151 (2017 AV Act)
Tennessee · Effective July 1, 2017 · 2017 Tenn. Pub. Acts Ch. 474; Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 55-30-101 et seq.
Tennessee's Automated Vehicles Act authorized fully driverless operation on Tennessee roads, set minimum-insurance requirements for AV networks ($5 million coverage), explicitly preempted local AV-specific regulation, and treated the automated driving system as the legal operator for traffic-law purposes.
-
In effect Strength: limited
UT System Policy IT0002 / procedure, Acceptable Use of Gener
University of Tennessee System · Effective March 1, 2025 · UT System Policy IT0002 / procedure, Acceptable Use of Generative AI
The University of Tennessee System's acceptable-use policy for generative AI bars entering FERPA/HIPAA-protected and confidential data into AI tools and requires independent verification and disclosure of AI-generated content.
-
In effect Strength: limited
TN HB 1847 data center ratepayer protection (2026)
TN · Effective July 1, 2026 · Tenn. HB 1847/SB 2128 (114th G.A., 2026) — signed May 7, 2026; eff. July 1, 2026
Tennessee HB 1847/SB 2128, signed May 7, 2026 and effective July 1, 2026, requires data centers drawing 50 megawatts or more of electricity to pay their proportionate share of transmission and distribution infrastructure costs, rather than spreading those costs across all utility ratepayers. The law prevents large hyperscale data centers from being cross-subsidized by ordinary residential and small commercial customers.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Attorney General Skrmetti Leads 44 States in Demanding Compa
Tennessee · Effective August 25, 2025 · Attorney General Skrmetti Leads 44 States in Demanding Companies End Predatory AI Interactions with Kids
Tennessee's Attorney General led a bipartisan coalition of 44 states in a demand letter to 12 major AI companies to implement safeguards against sexualized AI chatbot interactions with minors, applying consumer-protection authority to AI harms.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Tennessee Information Protection Act (opt out of automated profiling decisions)
Tennessee · Effective July 1, 2025 · Tenn. Code Ann. 47-18-3301 et seq. (TIPA); profiling opt-out at 47-18-3304
Tennessee's consumer privacy law gives state residents rights over how businesses handle their personal information, including the right to opt out of profiling that is carried out solely through automated processing and used to make decisions with legal or similarly significant effects. Businesses that act as controllers must also conduct and document data protection assessments for higher-risk processing activities, including certain profiling. The Tennessee Attorney General has exclusive enforcement authority, and there is no private right of action.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Enterprise Artificial Intelligence Policy (200-POL-007)
Tennessee · Effective January 1, 2024 · Enterprise Artificial Intelligence Policy (200-POL-007)
Tennessee's Department of Finance and Administration (Strategic Technology Solutions) sets minimum requirements for valid, reliable, transparent, and ethical use of AI across state departments, requiring monitoring of AI design, deployment, and procurement to minimize negative impacts.
-
In effect Strength: moderate
ELVIS Act
Tennessee · Effective July 1, 2024 · Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 47-25-1101 to -1108 (ELVIS Act, 2024)
The first US law protecting voices from AI cloning: Tennessee added 'voice' to its right-of-publicity law, so using AI to mimic someone's voice or likeness without permission is both a civil violation and a crime. It also allows lawsuits against those who distribute tools whose primary purpose is producing unauthorized voice or likeness replicas.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Tennessee SB 837 (AI is not a 'person' under TN law)
Tennessee · Effective April 23, 2026 · 2026 Tenn. Pub. Ch. 781 (SB 837); amends Tenn. Code Ann. Title 1
Tennessee amended its rules of statutory construction to make clear that artificial intelligence and related technology are not legal persons. The law specifies that the terms 'person,' 'life,' and 'natural person' do not include artificial intelligence, computer algorithms, software programs, computer hardware, or any type of machine. It also adds definitions of 'human being' and 'natural person' as living members of homo sapiens. The change is purely definitional and creates no penalty.
Federal AI rules that apply in Johnson City, Tennessee
These federal rules apply everywhere in the United States, including Johnson City, Tennessee. Showing the 10 strongest and most recent.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
TVA data center capacity commitment charge (2026)
Tennessee Valley Authority · Effective October 1, 2026 · Tenn. Valley Auth. Bd. of Dirs. — Data Center Capacity Commitment Charge (approved Aug. 20, 2026; eff. Oct. 1, 2026)
The Tennessee Valley Authority's Board of Directors approved a separate, higher wholesale rate for data centers on August 20, 2026, effective October 1. New or expanding data center loads above 5 megawatts now fall under a Capacity Commitment Charge attached to TVA's data center rate schedules, designed to recover the incremental capacity costs those customers impose on the system. The headline figures are substantial: upfront capacity commitment charges of roughly $1.5 million per megawatt, payable over three to five years, and an all-in average billing increase for data center customers of about 10%, phased in across three consecutive fiscal years. The stated purpose is to keep residential rates low while still serving growing data center demand. TVA matters here out of proportion to a single utility. It is a federal corporate agency supplying power across seven states, so this is not a state rate case but a regional cost-allocation decision reaching a large share of the Southeast — and TVA is among the first large US utilities to adopt a tariff aimed specifically at AI-driven load. Where most 2026 measures in this dataset restrict where data centers may be built, this one changes what they pay to run.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
Bartz v. Anthropic
N.D. Cal. · Effective September 5, 2025 · 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.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
COPPA + 2025 Rule (childrens data)
United States · Effective June 23, 2025 · 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.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
TAKE IT DOWN Act
United States · Effective May 19, 2025 · 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.
-
Blocked / in litigation
NetChoice v. Yost (Ohio)
S.D. Ohio · Effective April 16, 2025 · 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.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
Thaler v. Perlmutter (Copyright)
D.C. Cir. · Effective March 18, 2025 · 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.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
Louis v. SafeRent
D. Mass. · Effective November 20, 2024 · 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.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
FTC Impersonation Rule (AI)
United States · Effective April 1, 2024 · 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.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
FTC v. Rite Aid
FTC · Effective February 26, 2024 · FTC v. Rite Aid Corp., No. 2:23-cv-05023 (E.D. Pa. Dec. 19, 2023)
The FTC banned Rite Aid from using facial-recognition technology in its stores for five years after finding the pharmacy chain's FRT system falsely tagged customers — disproportionately women and people of color — as shoplifters, leading to wrongful detentions and humiliations.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
TCPA (AI voice calls)
United States · Effective February 8, 2024 · 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.
Frequently asked questions about AI laws in Johnson City, Tennessee
Are there AI laws in Johnson City, Tennessee?
What federal AI rules apply in Johnson City?
Does Tennessee have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Tennessee?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Johnson City?
How do I report an AI law violation in Johnson City?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Johnson City?
Is Johnson City regulated by Tennessee's consumer privacy act?
Have we missed an AI rule in Johnson City?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Johnson City 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.