AI Laws in Port Angeles, Washington

AI Laws USA tracks 28 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Port Angeles, Washington: 10+ federal rules, 17 Washington state-level rules, and 1 local Port Angeles ordinance. Coverage is strongest on consumer protection, government use of AI, consumer data privacy, and AI disclosure and transparency. 15 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.

Port Angeles local AI rules (and Clallam County County)

1 local AI rule specific to Port Angeles, Washington or Clallam County County.

  1. In effect Strength: moderate

    Port Angeles WA six-month data center moratorium (2026)

    Port Angeles, WA · Port Angeles, Wash. — six-month moratorium on accepting or approving new data-center projects, left unchanged after a public hearing September 15, 2026

    Port Angeles is keeping its SIX-MONTH data center moratorium — a temporary ban on ACCEPTING OR APPROVING new data-center projects — unchanged. The City Council held a public hearing on it on Tuesday night, September 15, 2026. Public testimony ran both ways: residents raised electricity, water use, noise and environmental impacts, while business and economic-development representatives cautioned against shutting the door on projects. The council left the moratorium in place. The most useful thing to come out of the hearing was a councilmember's reframing of what the permanent rules should do. Drew Schwab argued the city's eventual regulations may need to focus LESS ON DEFINING A 'DATA CENTER' AND MORE ON REGULATING THE IMPACTS OF LARGE RESOURCE USERS: 'As we move forward, I don't want to define data center. It doesn't matter if it's another industrial user. The elements that we don't want, these are the things we have identified that we do not care for, are not something we would allow to be able to be built in town.' That is a direct answer to a problem visible across this dataset. Definitional approaches are where data center ordinances leak. Poway is attempting to ban 'AI data centers' specifically, which invites an operator to recharacterise a facility as general-purpose colocation. Marysville, Kansas had to enumerate hyperscale, cloud, colocation, AI and cryptocurrency and then expressly exclude ordinary server rooms just to make its definition workable. Schwab's proposal sidesteps the whole problem: regulate megawatts drawn, gallons consumed and decibels emitted, and it stops mattering what the building is called. The practical difficulty, which the reporting does not address, is that impact-based thresholds sweep in existing industrial users a city may not intend to burden.

    View full entry · News report

Washington-level AI rules most relevant to Port Angeles

17 Washington state rules apply to residents and businesses in Port Angeles. Showing the 8 most relevant to Port Angeles's local picture; 9 more are on the Washington jurisdiction page.

  1. 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.

    View full entry · Agency page

  2. 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.

    View full entry · Statute

  3. 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.

    View full entry · Agency page

  4. 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.

    View full entry · Bill text

  5. Enacted (not yet in effect) Strength: limited

    HB 2225 (WA Chatbot Safety)

    Washington · Effective January 1, 2027 · Wash. ESHB 2225, Ch. 168, Laws of 2026 (new chapter in Title 19 RCW); enforced via ch. 19.86 RCW

    Washington requires AI companion chatbots to clearly tell users they are talking to an AI, not a person — at the start of a conversation and at least every three hours (every hour for known minors or bots aimed at minors). Operators must have crisis protocols that refer users expressing suicidal thoughts or self-harm to a suicide hotline or crisis text line, and must shield minors from sexual content and manipulative engagement tactics. Violations are unfair or deceptive practices under Washington's Consumer Protection Act, so consumers can sue and the Attorney General can enforce. Effective January 1, 2027.

    View full entry · Bill text

  6. Enacted (not yet in effect) Strength: limited

    HB 1170 (WA AI Content Disclosure)

    Washington · Effective February 1, 2027 · Wash. E2SHB 1170 (2026); Ch. 167, 2026 Laws

    Large AI image, video, and audio generators must embed hard-to-remove provenance data — watermarks or tamper-resistant metadata — in the synthetic content they create, where commercially and technically reasonable. This lets journalists, courts, and the public identify AI-generated media. Applies to generative AI services with over 1 million monthly users that are available to Washington consumers. Enforced only by the Washington Attorney General under the Consumer Protection Act. Effective February 1, 2027.

    View full entry · Bill text

  7. In effect Strength: limited

    WA DOI AI Bulletin

    WA · Effective April 22, 2024 · Washington OIC Technical Assistance Advisory 2024-02 (2024-04-22)

    The WA Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in WA must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.

    View full entry · Agency page

  8. In effect Strength: limited

    SSB 5886 (WA Digital Likeness Rights)

    Washington · Effective June 11, 2026 · Wash. SSB 5886, Ch. 69, 2026 Laws; RCW ch. 63.60 (amending personality rights statute)

    Washington updated its personality-rights law so that AI-generated audio or video that realistically mimics someone's face or voice without consent — called a 'forged digital likeness' — is now a civil violation. Victims can seek court injunctions to stop the misuse, and the civil penalty for each infringement is $3,000 plus any actual damages they can prove. The law became effective June 11, 2026.

    View full entry · Legal analysis

See all 17 Washington AI rules

Federal AI rules that apply in Port Angeles, Washington

These federal rules apply everywhere in the United States, including Port Angeles, Washington. Showing the 10 strongest and most recent.

  1. 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.

    View full entry · News report

  2. 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.

    View full entry · Court record

  3. 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.

    View full entry · Agency page

  4. 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.

    View full entry · Agency page

  5. 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.

    View full entry · Court record

  6. 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.

    View full entry · Court record

  7. 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.

    View full entry · Court record

  8. 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.

    View full entry · Agency page

  9. 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.

    View full entry · Agency page

  10. 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.

    View full entry · Agency page

See all federal AI rules

Frequently asked questions about AI laws in Port Angeles, Washington

Are there AI laws in Port Angeles, Washington?
Yes. We index 1 local AI rule that specifically apply in Port Angeles, Washington, including Port Angeles WA six-month data center moratorium (2026). On top of that, 17 Washington state-level rules and 10+ federal AI rules apply throughout the city.
What federal AI rules apply in Port Angeles?
Every federal AI rule in our index applies in Port Angeles, Washington. The highest-strength federal rules currently include TVA data center capacity commitment charge (2026), Bartz v. Anthropic, COPPA + 2025 Rule (childrens data). 10+ federal entries are tracked in total.
Does Washington have an AI privacy law?
Washington has 8 privacy- or automated-decision-related AI rules in our index, including Washington SHB 1672 (employee monitoring notice, ADS restrictions, emotion AI ban) and Plateau Peoples TK/BC Labels. These apply to residents of Port Angeles.
Are deepfakes illegal in Washington?
Washington has 5 deepfake- or AI-image-related laws in our index, including Plateau Peoples TK/BC Labels and Washington HB 1999 (criminalizes AI/fabricated CSAM and nonconsensual fake intimate images). Additionally, the federal TAKE IT DOWN Act covers non-consensual intimate-image deepfakes nationwide.
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Port Angeles?
Employer use of AI to screen job applicants in Port Angeles, Washington is governed by Washington SHB 1672 (employee monitoring notice, ADS restrictions, emotion AI ban). Federal civil-rights and EEOC guidance also applies.
How do I report an AI law violation in Port Angeles?
Most AI rules are enforced by an agency listed on each individual entry. For Washington state laws, the Washington Attorney General's office is the usual starting point. For federal AI rules, file complaints with the relevant federal agency (FTC, EEOC, HUD, CFPB, etc.) named on each entry. We also accept tips at feedback@ailawsusa.com.
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Port Angeles?
Facial-recognition use in Port Angeles, Washington is addressed by WA SB 6280 (2020, first-in-nation state FR-government law) and WA Biometric Identifiers Act (2017). See those entries for what is allowed, who must comply, and enforcement details.
Is Port Angeles regulated by Washington's consumer privacy act?
Yes. Washington state laws apply uniformly to residents and businesses operating in Port Angeles. See the Washington jurisdiction page for the complete list of consumer-protection and privacy rules.

Compliance guides for Washington businesses

Plain-English guides to the Washington AI and data laws companies most often need to comply with:

Washington My Health My Data Act

Have we missed an AI rule in Port Angeles?

This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Port Angeles 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.