AI Laws in La Conner, Washington
AI Laws USA tracks 28 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in La Conner, Washington: 10+ federal rules, 17 Washington state-level rules, and 1 local La Conner ordinance. Coverage is strongest on government use of AI, consumer data privacy, AI disclosure and transparency, and consumer protection. 15 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
La Conner local AI rules (and Skagit County)
1 local AI rule specific to La Conner, Washington or Skagit County.
-
In effect Strength: moderate
La Conner WA data center moratorium (2026)
La Conner, WA · Effective July 29, 2026 · Town of La Conner, Wash. — Temporary Data Center Moratorium (July 29, 2026)
The La Conner Town Council approved a temporary moratorium on data center permit applications on July 29, 2026, running at least six months. La Conner had received no data center permit applications and nobody had even asked about submitting one — the pause is preemptive. Planning Director Ajah Eills said the moratorium 'allows the town to take a beat and really look at those regulations and whether or not any form of data center would ever be appropriate here, or if we should handle data centers in a more prohibitive way,' and pointed to the water demands of data centers and to impacts seen in other communities, which matter here because La Conner sits very close to a large water source. Town staff planned to draft an ordinance revising La Conner's land use regulations to address data centers during the pause. The town borrowed Skagit County's definition of a data center and modelled its moratorium language on the county's, which had taken effect for unincorporated Skagit County on June 1, 2026. A public hearing on the moratorium was scheduled for the August 25 council meeting.
Washington-level AI rules most relevant to La Conner
17 Washington state rules apply to residents and businesses in La Conner. Showing the 8 most relevant to La Conner's local picture; 9 more are on the Washington jurisdiction page.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Interim Guidelines for Purposeful and Responsible Use of Gen
Washington · Effective August 8, 2023 · Interim Guidelines for Purposeful and Responsible Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Washington State Government
WaTech's interim guidelines establish principles and dos-and-don'ts for state employees using generative AI, covering fact-checking, bias reduction, attribution, and protection of sensitive or confidential data.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Human-Centered AI Guidance for K-12 Public Schools
Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) · Effective July 1, 2024 · Human-Centered AI Guidance for K-12 Public Schools
Washington's state superintendent issued 'Human-AI-Human' guidance for K-12 schools covering AI foundations, classroom implementation, ethical considerations, policy suggestions, and privacy compliance.
-
In effect Strength: limited
WA SB 5982 (Data Center / Clean Energy)
Washington · Effective June 11, 2026 · WA SB 5982, Chapter 181, Laws of 2026 (2025-26 Leg. Sess.)
Washington bill that closes a loophole in the state's 100% clean energy law (Clean Energy Transformation Act) so that large customers — especially data centers — must meet the same carbon-neutrality and renewable-energy deadlines as electric utilities. Signed by Governor Ferguson on 2026-03-24 as Chapter 181, Laws of 2026; in effect since 2026-06-11.
-
In effect Strength: moderate
WA SB 6280 (2020, first-in-nation state FR-government law)
WA · Effective July 1, 2021 · RCW Ch. 43.386 (SB 6280, 2020)
Washington SB 6280 (signed March 31, 2020) was the first U.S. state law expressly regulating state and local government use of facial recognition. It requires accountability reports, public notice, warrant requirements for ongoing surveillance, and independent testing for accuracy and bias. Codified at RCW Ch. 43.386. Still in effect 2026.
-
In effect Strength: limited
WA EO 24-01
WA · Effective January 30, 2024 · Wash. Exec. Order No. 24-01 (Jan. 19, 2024)
Governor Inslee's EO 24-01 directs WaTech to develop generative AI guidelines for Washington state government, identify high-value GenAI initiatives, and catalog high-risk uses across agencies.
-
In effect Strength: moderate
Plateau Peoples TK/BC Labels
Plateau Peoples' Web Portal (Multi-Tribal) · Effective January 1, 2015 · Plateau Peoples' Web Portal — multi-tribal TK/BC Labels initiative
Six Plateau tribes — Colville, Umatilla, Warm Springs, Yakama, Spokane, and Coeur d'Alene — jointly implement Local Contexts Traditional Knowledge and Biocultural Labels on digital cultural-heritage collections. A working Indigenous data sovereignty mechanism applicable to AI training data: labels travel with the data and assert community-defined access and use rules.
-
In effect Strength: limited
My Health My Data Act
Washington · Effective March 31, 2024 · RCW ch. 19.373
A sweeping health-data privacy law covering 'consumer health data' far beyond HIPAA — including biometric data, health inferences drawn by algorithms, and reproductive health information. Companies need consent to collect or share such data, must honor deletion requests, and cannot geofence health facilities. Consumers can sue under Washington's Consumer Protection Act.
-
In effect Strength: stronger
Washington SHB 1672 (employee monitoring notice, ADS restrictions, emotion AI ban)
Washington · Effective July 1, 2026 · Wash. SHB 1672 (2025 Session), effective July 1, 2026
Washington SHB 1672, effective July 1, 2026, is one of the most comprehensive U.S. employer monitoring laws. Employers must give employees 15 calendar days' written notice before any monitoring begins or before any change to monitoring. Notice must specify what is monitored, the method used, the purpose, who can access the data, and how long it is retained. The law prohibits off-duty monitoring, monitoring in private spaces (bathrooms, locker rooms), and monitoring personal vehicles. It restricts AI-based emotion recognition, gait recognition, and facial recognition in employment-related decisions. Employers must conduct impact assessments before deploying automated decision systems and must provide human oversight of ADS-driven performance evaluations. Employees have a private right of action with damages of at least $500 per violation plus attorney fees. Civil penalties may reach $10,000 per violation. The law applies to any employer with one or more Washington employees, including remote employees of out-of-state companies.
Federal AI rules that apply in La Conner, Washington
These federal rules apply everywhere in the United States, including La Conner, Washington. 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 La Conner, Washington
Are there AI laws in La Conner, Washington?
What federal AI rules apply in La Conner?
Does Washington have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Washington?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in La Conner?
How do I report an AI law violation in La Conner?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in La Conner?
Is La Conner regulated by Washington's consumer privacy act?
Compliance guides for Washington businesses
Plain-English guides to the Washington AI and data laws companies most often need to comply with:
Have we missed an AI rule in La Conner?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a La Conner 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.