AI Laws in La Crosse, Wisconsin
AI Laws USA tracks 24 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in La Crosse, Wisconsin: 10+ federal rules, 12 Wisconsin state-level rules, and 2 local La Crosse/county ordinances. Coverage is strongest on government use of AI, data-center siting and energy, consumer protection, and consumer data privacy. 12 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
La Crosse local AI rules (and La Crosse County)
2 local AI rules specific to La Crosse, Wisconsin or La Crosse County.
-
In effect Strength: moderate
La Crosse WI city 18-month data center moratorium (2026)
La Crosse, WI · Effective August 13, 2026 · City of La Crosse, Wis. — 18-Month Data Center Moratorium (Aug. 13, 2026)
The La Crosse Common Council approved an 18-month moratorium on data center development inside the city on August 13, 2026. Unlike most municipal pauses, this one defines what it covers by capacity rather than by label: the moratorium applies to facilities able to store, process, retrieve or distribute more than 1 petabyte of data, or that would consume more than 2 megawatts of electricity. That threshold matters because it catches large facilities regardless of what a developer calls them, while leaving ordinary server rooms alone. The ordinance lists the concerns driving it — electrical connections and overall power demand, electromagnetic fields, noise pollution, air quality, water resources and water use, and fire hazards. The city action followed its own county: La Crosse County had adopted a parallel 18-month moratorium in June 2026 covering unincorporated areas, and formed an ad hoc committee to study data centers. The measure moved through the Plan Commission on August 3 and a public hearing before the Judiciary and Administration Committee on August 5 before the council vote.
-
In effect Strength: moderate
La Crosse County WI 18-month data center moratorium (2026)
La Crosse County, WI · Effective June 18, 2026 · La Crosse Cnty., Wis. — 18-Month Data Center Moratorium (June 18, 2026)
The La Crosse County Board of Supervisors voted 26-2 on June 18, 2026 to impose an 18-month moratorium on new data center decisions and development, with supervisors Ken Schlimgen and Jeff Fimreite voting no and two members absent. The pause holds data center actions while a special committee studies the industry's likely environmental and economic effects. That committee was set up the month before, in May 2026, and is deliberately broad: it includes several board members plus a representative from each of the 18 municipalities in La Crosse County, so the towns and villages have a seat even where the county cannot regulate them. The important limit is jurisdictional — the moratorium only reaches land where county zoning has authority, which means most of those 18 municipalities are not covered by it. The City of La Crosse closed part of that gap by adopting its own 18-month moratorium on August 13, 2026.
Wisconsin-level AI rules most relevant to La Crosse
12 Wisconsin state rules apply to residents and businesses in La Crosse. Showing the 8 most relevant to La Crosse's local picture; 4 more are on the Wisconsin jurisdiction page.
-
In effect Strength: limited
We Energies Very Large Customer (VLC) Data Center Tariff Ord
Public Service Commission of Wisconsin (We Energies) · Effective April 24, 2026 · We Energies Very Large Customer (VLC) Data Center Tariff Order
The Wisconsin PSC approved but overhauled We Energies' data center tariff, lowering the eligibility threshold from 500 MW to 100 MW, extending the minimum contract term to 15 years, and removing a capacity-only option so data centers pay their full share and existing customers are not subsidizing them.
-
In effect Strength: moderate
Oneida Nation (WI) temporary data center moratorium (2026)
Oneida Nation (WI) · Effective July 22, 2026 · Oneida Nation of Wisconsin Business Committee Resolution 07-22-26-B (July 22, 2026)
The Oneida Nation of Wisconsin's Business Committee adopted Resolution 07-22-26-B on July 22, 2026, imposing a temporary moratorium on the development, construction, and operation of data centers on Oneida Nation lands. The Business Committee found that incomplete information currently exists regarding the potential impacts of data center development and desired to provide adequate time for consultation with Oneida Nation members, technical experts, governmental partners, utility providers, and other stakeholders concerning the potential costs and benefits of such facilities. The Oneida Nation of Wisconsin is a federally recognized tribe located near Green Bay in Brown and Outagamie Counties, with approximately 16,000 enrolled members. The moratorium joins a growing list of tribal government restrictions on data-center development enacted in 2026 by the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma (March), the Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians (April), the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (May), the Cherokee Nation (August), and the Hualapai Tribe (September).
-
In effect Strength: limited
WI PDD Act 13 (2017)
Wisconsin · Effective July 1, 2017 · Wis. Stat. § 346.804; 2017 Wis. Act 13
Wisconsin authorized sidewalk delivery robots up to 80 lb at up to 10 mph, requires operators to carry $100,000 in liability insurance, and allows cities to set additional rules but not outright bans.
-
Blocked / in litigation
Ostergaard v. Microsoft — data center noise class action (2026)
Wisconsin · Effective July 1, 2026 · Ostergaard v. Microsoft Corp., No. 2:26-cv-01169-JPS (E.D. Wis. filed July 1, 2026)
Three homeowners — Garret Ostergaard, David Wade and Joy Wade — filed a putative class action against Microsoft Corporation on 2026-07-01 in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin over noise from Microsoft's 'Fairwater' AI data center on Braun Road in the Village of Mount Pleasant. The complaint alleges the facility, a multi-building campus of roughly 1.2 million square feet requiring hundreds of megawatts, emits unreasonable and excessive noise onto surrounding residential properties through its cooling systems and backup generators, causing loss of use and enjoyment and diminished property value. The pleaded counts are Count I private nuisance — substantial and unreasonable interference alleged to be intentional, knowing, reckless and/or negligent, recurring, ongoing and abatable with ordinary care — and Count II negligence, for negligently constructing, maintaining and operating the facility including inadequate soundproofing.
-
In effect Strength: limited
State of Wisconsin Acceptable Technology Use, Access, and Se
Wisconsin · Effective March 10, 2025 · State of Wisconsin Acceptable Technology Use, Access, and Security Policy (includes AI-use provisions)
The Wisconsin Department of Administration's enterprise technology policy governs acceptable use of state IT resources by executive-branch employees and incorporates guidance on the use of artificial intelligence.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Empowering Lifelong Learning: AI Guidance for Enhancing K-12
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) · Effective July 29, 2024 · Empowering Lifelong Learning: AI Guidance for Enhancing K-12 and Library Education
Wisconsin's education department released 22-page guidance for K-12 classrooms and libraries covering core AI concepts, ethics/data policy, security, professional development, and curriculum integration.
-
In effect Strength: limited
WI EO 211
WI · Effective August 23, 2023 · Wis. Exec. Order No. 211 (Aug. 23, 2023)
Governor Evers's EO 211 created a workforce-focused AI Task Force that produced a 2024 advisory action plan on AI's labor-market impact, with recommendations for workforce development and reskilling.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect) Strength: limited
Wisconsin 452.136(1m) (real estate ads must disclose AI-altered property images)
Wisconsin · Effective January 1, 2027 · Wis. Stat. 452.136(1m); 2025 Wis. Act 69
Wisconsin will require licensed real estate professionals to disclose in their advertising whenever an ad has been altered or modified using technology, including AI, to add, remove, or change elements of a property in a way that creates a false or misleading impression. The rule targets AI-edited listing photos that could mislead buyers or renters. It takes effect January 1, 2027.
Federal AI rules that apply in La Crosse, Wisconsin
These federal rules apply everywhere in the United States, including La Crosse, Wisconsin. 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 Crosse, Wisconsin
Are there AI laws in La Crosse, Wisconsin?
What federal AI rules apply in La Crosse?
Does Wisconsin have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Wisconsin?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in La Crosse?
How do I report an AI law violation in La Crosse?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in La Crosse?
Is La Crosse regulated by Wisconsin's consumer privacy act?
Have we missed an AI rule in La Crosse?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a La Crosse 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.