Home › AI Laws › Minnesota › Minneapolis
AI Laws in Minneapolis, Minnesota
As of 2026-08-12, AI Laws USA tracks 28 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Minneapolis, Minnesota: 10+ federal protections, 12 Minnesota state-level rules, and 6 local Minneapolis ordinances. Coverage is strongest on consumer data privacy, data-center siting and energy, automated decision-making, and government use of AI. 13 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
Minneapolis local AI rules (and Hennepin County)
6 local AI rules specific to Minneapolis, Minnesota or Hennepin County.
-
In effect Moderate protection
Minneapolis algorithmic rent ban (Ord. 2025-010, eff. Mar 1, 2026)
Minneapolis, MN · Effective 2026-03-01 · Minneapolis Ord. 2025-010 (File 2024-01399), adding § 244.2070 to City Code, eff. March 1, 2026
Minneapolis City Council adopted Ordinance 2025-010 amending Title 12, Chapter 244 of the City Code to add Section 244.2070, prohibiting residential landlords from using algorithmic devices that employ nonpublic competitor data to recommend rental pricing or vacancy strategies. Effective March 1, 2026. A White House report estimated Twin Cities renters paid on average $324 more per unit annually due to pricing algorithms, with the national total exceeding $3.8 billion. Private right of action; license revocation possible for landlord violations.
-
In effect Moderate protection
Minneapolis rejects Skydio DFR contract 6-6 (Jul. 16, 2026)
Minneapolis, MN · Effective 2026-07-16 · Minneapolis City Council 6-6 deadlock, July 16, 2026, rejecting MPD Skydio drone-as-first-responder contract
On July 16, 2026, the Minneapolis City Council deadlocked 6-6 on a proposed contract with drone maker Skydio for a police drone-as-first-responder (DFR) program, killing the deal. The vote followed a 75-day free trial Skydio provided the Minneapolis Police Department in north Minneapolis. Council opposition centered on Skydio's sales to ICE and to Israel, and on data-leak concerns. The rejection ends, for now, MPD's path to a permanent DFR program, making Minneapolis one of the larger US cities to decline a police drone contract after piloting one.
-
In effect Limited protection
Six-month moratorium on data centers >350,000 sq ft (Minneapolis)
Minneapolis · Effective 2026-05-22 · Minneapolis interim data center moratorium ordinance (May 22, 2026)
Six-month moratorium on the construction, re-establishment, or expansion of data centers larger than 350,000 square feet anywhere in Minneapolis. As an interim ordinance, it took effect immediately and did not require the mayor's signature. Exempts data center projects under 350,000 sq ft within the downtown core.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect) Moderate protection
Minneapolis Data Center Moratorium
Minneapolis, MN · Enacted 2026-05-22 · Minneapolis, Minn., interim data center moratorium (May 22, 2026)
On May 22, 2026 the Minneapolis City Council voted 8–5 to impose a six-month moratorium on new large data centers while the city studies environmental and grid impacts and drafts zoning regulations. The pause targets facilities larger than 350,000 square feet and exempts smaller downtown developments — a size- and location-limited pause, not a total ban.
-
In effect Limited protection
Minneapolis Public Schools
Minneapolis, MN · Effective 2024-09-04 · Minneapolis Public Schools — AI Guidance for Educators (2024-09-04)
District-issued educator guidance: vetted tool list, ban on entering student IEP or behavior data into generative AI, AI must not be sole basis for academic placement or discipline, recommended classroom disclosure when AI is used to create materials.
-
In effect Moderate protection
Minneapolis FR Ban
Minneapolis, MN · Enacted 2021-02-12 · Minneapolis, Minn., FR Ban Ordinance (Feb. 12, 2021)
Minneapolis bans city departments, including the police department, from procuring facial recognition technology or using data derived from it, with a council-approved exceptions process and annual reporting. No repeal or weakening amendment was found — the ordinance appears to remain in effect as of June 2026.
Minnesota-level AI rules most relevant to Minneapolis
12 Minnesota state rules apply to residents and businesses in Minneapolis. Showing the 8 most relevant to Minneapolis's local picture; 4 more are on the Minnesota jurisdiction page.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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
-
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.
-
Proposed / pending Proposed or pending
SF4203
MN · MN SF4203 (94th Legislature 2025-2026)
Exemption of data centers modification for sales and use tax
Federal AI rules that apply in Minneapolis, Minnesota
These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including Minneapolis, Minnesota. Showing the 10 strongest and most recent.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
Frequently asked questions about AI laws in Minneapolis, Minnesota
Are there AI laws in Minneapolis, Minnesota?
What federal AI rules apply in Minneapolis?
Does Minnesota have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Minnesota?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Minneapolis?
How do I report an AI law violation in Minneapolis?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Minneapolis?
Is Minneapolis regulated by Minnesota's consumer privacy act?
Have we missed an AI rule in Minneapolis?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Minneapolis 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.