Home › AI Laws › Maine › Portland
AI Laws in Portland, Maine
As of 2026-08-12, AI Laws USA tracks 21 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Portland, Maine: 10+ federal protections, 10 Maine state-level rules, and 1 local Portland ordinance. Coverage is strongest on government use of AI, consumer data privacy, automated decision-making, and consumer protection. 9 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
Portland local AI rules (and Cumberland County)
1 local AI rule specific to Portland, Maine or Cumberland County.
-
In effect Stronger protection
Portland (Maine) Facial Surveillance Ban
Portland, ME · Enacted 2020-08-03 · Portland, Me., facial surveillance ban (Aug. 2020), as amended by Question B (Nov. 2020)
Portland, Maine's City Council banned city employees, including police, from using facial surveillance in August 2020, and voters strengthened the ban that November by passing Question B, which lets people sue the city for violations. Because it was enacted by referendum, the council could not amend it for five years. Remains in effect as of June 2026.
Maine-level AI rules most relevant to Portland
10 Maine state rules apply to residents and businesses in Portland. Showing the 8 most relevant to Portland's local picture; 2 more are on the Maine jurisdiction page.
-
In effect Moderate protection
An Order Establishing the Maine Artificial Intelligence Task
Maine · Effective 2024-12-20 · An Order Establishing the Maine Artificial Intelligence Task Force
Governor Janet Mills' executive order creates a 21-member Maine Artificial Intelligence Task Force to study AI's implications for the state, protect residents from harmful AI uses, and identify opportunities for public-sector AI deployment, with a final report due to the Governor and Legislature by October 31, 2025.
-
In effect Moderate protection
ME LD 1585 (FR limitation)
ME · Effective 2021-10-01 · P.L. 2021 ch. 394 (Me. LD 1585)
Maine LD 1585 is the strictest U.S. state law on government face surveillance — limits use to serious crime investigation via state agency conduit, with logging and a private right of action.
-
In effect Limited protection
GenAI Tools and Acceptable Use Policy
Maine · Effective 2026-03-06 · GenAI Tools and Acceptable Use Policy
The Maine Office of Information Technology's generative AI policy (superseding the earlier GenAI moratorium) guides responsible use of GenAI on state IT infrastructure, requiring compliance with data classification standards, prohibiting confidential data inputs to public AI systems, and holding users accountable for AI outputs.
-
In effect Moderate protection
Maine LD 61 (employer surveillance disclosure & prohibition)
Maine · Effective 2026-07-14 · Maine P.L. 2025, Ch. 524 (LD 61 / H.P. 25), 26 M.R.S. § 620-A, effective July 14, 2026
Maine's LD 61 (P.L. 2025, Ch. 524) requires employers to notify employees before any surveillance begins and to disclose surveillance practices to job applicants during interviews. Employers must provide annual written notice to all current employees describing what is monitored, how, and why. Employees may refuse installation of monitoring software on their personal devices. The law prohibits audiovisual monitoring in an employee's home, personal vehicle, or personal property. Civil fines of $100–$500 apply per violation. The law covers all public and private employers in Maine. Effective July 14, 2026.
-
In effect Moderate protection
Maine mental-health AI limits (2026)
Maine · Effective 2026-07-29 · Maine LD 2082 / HP 1397 (P.L. 2026, Ch. 687, 132nd Leg.); signed April 13, 2026; eff. July 29, 2026
Maine enacted LD 2082 (signed April 13, 2026 by Governor Janet Mills; effective July 29, 2026) limiting how licensed mental health professionals can use AI: only for administrative and limited supplementary tasks. AI may not make therapeutic communications, treatment decisions, or independently interact with patients. Professionals must get patient consent before using ambient-listening or other AI-powered recording tools.
-
In effect Limited protection
Maine AI Chatbot Disclosure Law
Maine · Effective 2025-09-16 · 10 M.R.S. ch. 239, Sec. 1500-Y (reallocated to Sec. 1500-DD); P.L. 2025, ch. 294 (L.D. 1727)
Maine prohibits businesses from using an AI chatbot or other computer technology in commercial dealings with a consumer in a way that could mislead a reasonable person into thinking they are interacting with a human, unless the consumer is clearly and conspicuously told they are not. A violation is treated as a violation of the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act.
-
In effect Limited protection
Maine AI-in-Therapy Law (licensed pros only)
Maine · Effective 2026-07-28 · P.L. 2026, ch. 687 (L.D. 2082 / H.P. 1397); 10 M.R.S. Sec. 1500-EE
Maine bars anyone from providing, advertising, or offering therapy or psychotherapy to the public — including through internet-based AI — unless the services are delivered by a licensed professional. Licensed professionals may use AI only for administrative or supplementary support, and only if they retain full responsibility for its outputs; using AI for supplementary support requires written client notice and consent. AI may not make independent therapeutic decisions, engage in therapeutic communication with clients, or generate treatment plans without the licensee's review and approval.
-
Vetoed Limited protection
Maine Data Center Moratorium (vetoed)
Maine · Me. LD 307 (132nd Leg.); passed ~Apr. 14, 2026; vetoed Apr. 24, 2026
Maine's legislature became the first in the nation to pass a statewide data center moratorium — a pause on data centers over 20 megawatts until November 2027 — but Gov. Janet Mills vetoed it on April 24, 2026. She said she supports a temporary moratorium but wanted an exemption for development already underway at the former Androscoggin Mill site in the town of Jay. So there is no statewide Maine data center moratorium; local moratoriums (e.g., Bangor) still apply.
Federal AI rules that apply in Portland, Maine
These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including Portland, Maine. 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 Portland, Maine
Are there AI laws in Portland, Maine?
What federal AI rules apply in Portland?
Does Maine have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Maine?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Portland?
How do I report an AI law violation in Portland?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Portland?
Is Portland regulated by Maine's consumer privacy act?
Have we missed an AI rule in Portland?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Portland 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.