AI Laws in Kalamazoo, Michigan
AI Laws USA tracks 30 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Kalamazoo, Michigan: 10+ federal rules, 19 Michigan state-level rules, and 1 local Kalamazoo ordinance. Coverage is strongest on data-center siting and energy, automated decision-making, consumer protection, and deepfakes. 12 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
Kalamazoo local AI rules (and Kalamazoo County County)
1 local AI rule specific to Kalamazoo, Michigan or Kalamazoo County County.
-
In effect Strength: moderate
Kalamazoo MI data center moratorium (2026)
Kalamazoo, MI · Effective August 17, 2026 · City of Kalamazoo, MI, City Commission resolution, data center moratorium (Aug. 17, 2026)
The Kalamazoo City Commission voted unanimously in a late-night session on August 17, 2026 to pause applications for data centers, battery storage systems, crypto mining centers and AI data centers. The resolution keeps the pause active through August 16, 2027. Residents had raised concerns about noise, lighting, diesel generators, water use, wastewater and emissions after a cannabis processing facility was pitched as a data center site. The city is now working to write the moratorium into its zoning code so it is enforceable under the zoning code and state law; a City Commission public hearing on that change was set for its next meeting.
Michigan-level AI rules most relevant to Kalamazoo
19 Michigan state rules apply to residents and businesses in Kalamazoo. Showing the 8 most relevant to Kalamazoo's local picture; 11 more are on the Michigan jurisdiction page.
-
In effect Strength: moderate
Michigan PSC DTE–Google data center contracts
Michigan · Effective October 1, 2026 · Michigan PSC Case No. U-22058 (order Oct. 1, 2026)
Michigan's Public Service Commission approved DTE Electric's special power contracts with Google for a planned data center in Van Buren Township, on the condition that other customers do not bear the project's costs. The 20-year deal includes a minimum bill of 80% of contracted capacity and an early-exit payment covering at least 15 years of minimum charges. Google must also pay for up to 1,600 MW of renewable energy and 480 MW of battery storage built by DTE.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
Sault Tribe (MI) AI Data Center Moratorium
Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians · Effective April 7, 2026 · Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Board Resolution (Apr. 7, 2026)
Sault Tribe Board of Directors voted unanimously to halt any AI data center development on tribal lands indefinitely, citing strain on local resources and uncertain economic benefit. Came after dozens of community members spoke at public comment.
-
In effect Strength: limited
MI SAVE Acts (2016 AV package)
Michigan · Effective December 9, 2016 · P.A. 332–335 of 2016
Michigan's 2016 four-bill 'SAVE' package made the state one of the most comprehensive AV jurisdictions: it legalized fully driverless operation, authorized commercial AV networks (ride-hail with self-driving cars), allowed truck platooning, established the American Center for Mobility, and explicitly limited manufacturer liability when third parties convert vehicles to autonomous operation.
-
Proposed / pending
HB6137
MI · MI HB6137 (103rd Legislature)
Businesses: other; community benefit agreements; require certain data centers to be subject to. Creates new act. TIE BAR WITH: HB 6135'26, HB 6136'26, HB 6140'26, HB 6141'26, HB 6138'26, HB 6142'26, HB 6139'26
-
Proposed / pending
HB6138
MI · MI HB6138 (103rd Legislature)
Businesses: other; data center water usage requirements; provide for. Creates new act. TIE BAR WITH: HB 6135'26, HB 6140'26, HB 6141'26, HB 6137'26, HB 6142'26, HB 6139'26
-
Proposed / pending
SB1050
MI · MI SB1050 (103rd Legislature)
Businesses: other; community benefit agreements; require certain data centers to be subject to. Creates new act.
-
Proposed / pending
HB6139
MI · MI HB6139 (103rd Legislature)
Construction: permits; acoustic engineering report for data center; require to receive building permit. Amends 1972 PA 230 (MCL 125.1501 - 125.1531) by adding sec. 10a. TIE BAR WITH: HB 6135'26, HB 6140'26, HB 6141'26, HB 6137'26, HB 6138'26, HB 6142'26
-
Proposed / pending
HB6135
MI · MI HB6135 (103rd Legislature)
Public utilities: rates; large load commercial rates for data centers; establish. Amends 1939 PA 3 (MCL 460.1 - 460.11) by adding sec. 10ii. TIE BAR WITH: HB 6140'26, HB 6141'26, HB 6137'26, HB 6138'26, HB 6142'26, HB 6139'26
Federal AI rules that apply in Kalamazoo, Michigan
These federal rules apply everywhere in the United States, including Kalamazoo, Michigan. 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 Kalamazoo, Michigan
Are there AI laws in Kalamazoo, Michigan?
What federal AI rules apply in Kalamazoo?
Does Michigan have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Michigan?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Kalamazoo?
How do I report an AI law violation in Kalamazoo?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Kalamazoo?
Is Kalamazoo regulated by Michigan's consumer privacy act?
Have we missed an AI rule in Kalamazoo?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Kalamazoo 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.