AI Laws in Saint Paul, Minnesota
AI Laws USA tracks 24 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Saint Paul, Minnesota: 10+ federal rules, 13 Minnesota state-level rules, and 1 local Saint Paul ordinance. Coverage is strongest on consumer data privacy, education AI, automated decision-making, and consumer protection. 10 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
Saint Paul local AI rules (and Ramsey County)
1 local AI rule specific to Saint Paul, Minnesota or Ramsey County.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Saint Paul Public Schools
Saint Paul, MN · Effective October 8, 2024 · Saint Paul Public Schools — Generative AI Acceptable Use Guidance (2024-10-08)
Guidance designates Google Gemini, NotebookLM, Seesaw, and Schoology PowerBuddy as approved AI tools for staff (offered through district accounts with enterprise protections), bars use of consumer AI tools with student data, requires teacher disclosure to families when AI is used for instructional design, and prohibits AI-generated discipline recommendations without administrator review.
Minnesota-level AI rules most relevant to Saint Paul
13 Minnesota state rules apply to residents and businesses in Saint Paul. Showing the 8 most relevant to Saint Paul's local picture; 5 more are on the Minnesota jurisdiction page.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Minnesota State systemwide Generative AI guidance and approv
Minnesota State (Minnesota State Colleges and Universities) · Effective July 3, 2025 · 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 Strength: limited
Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act
Minnesota · Effective July 31, 2025 · 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 Strength: moderate
MN HF 1606 AI Nudification Ban (2026)
Minnesota · Effective August 1, 2026 · Minn. Sess. Law 2026, Ch. [pending publication]; HF 1606 (94th Leg., 2025-2026)
Minnesota enacted the first state law in the United States banning AI-powered 'nudification' technology — software that digitally strips clothing from images or videos of real people to create fake nude or sexualized images. Signed by Gov. Tim Walz on May 7, 2026, and effective August 1, 2026, the law makes it illegal for any website, application, software, or service to allow users to access, download, or use nudification tools, or to perform nudification on a user's behalf — even with the user's consent. Civil penalties are at least $500,000 per unlawful access, download, or use, enforced by the Attorney General under Minn. Stat. § 8.31. Injured persons can also sue for up to three times their actual damages, punitive damages, and injunctive relief. Elon Musk's xAI Corp. sued AG Keith Ellison on July 27, 2026 to block the law; a federal judge (Judge Donovan Frank) denied the preliminary injunction on July 31, 2026 and again on September 4, 2026.
-
In effect Strength: limited
Attorney General Ellison releases consumer alert on DHS' digital surveillance an
MN · Effective January 15, 2026 · 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.
-
Blocked / in litigation
xAI v. Ellison (MN nudification ban challenge)
Minnesota · Effective July 27, 2026 · xAI Corp. v. Ellison, D. Minn. (2026)
Elon Musk's xAI Corp. filed a federal lawsuit in Minnesota on July 27, 2026 — three months after Gov. Walz signed the state's AI nudification ban — seeking to block the law on First Amendment grounds. U.S. District Judge Donovan Frank denied xAI's first preliminary injunction request on July 31, 2026, just one day before the law took effect on August 1. The judge denied a second injunction bid on September 4, 2026, rejecting xAI's irreparable-harm argument and noting the company's delay in bringing suit. The Minnesota AG's office argued the law protects people from the serious harm of non-consensual deepfake intimate imagery. The underlying lawsuit remains pending on the merits.
-
In effect Strength: moderate
MN drone-warrant law (2020)
Minnesota · Effective August 1, 2020 · 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 Strength: limited
Public Artificial Intelligence Services Security Standard
Minnesota · Effective January 1, 2024 · 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.
-
Expired
SF5231
MN · MN SF5231 (94th Legislature 2025-2026)
Data centers tax exemption repeal; contingent reduction in special education aid appropriation repeal
Federal AI rules that apply in Saint Paul, Minnesota
These federal rules apply everywhere in the United States, including Saint Paul, Minnesota. 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 Saint Paul, Minnesota
Are there AI laws in Saint Paul, Minnesota?
What federal AI rules apply in Saint Paul?
Does Minnesota have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Minnesota?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Saint Paul?
How do I report an AI law violation in Saint Paul?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Saint Paul?
Is Saint Paul regulated by Minnesota's consumer privacy act?
Have we missed an AI rule in Saint Paul?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Saint Paul 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.