Home › Topics › children's online safety
U.S. AI Laws: children's online safety
As of 2026-08-12, AI Laws USA tracks 179 U.S. AI rules on children's online safety across federal, state, county, and city government. Each entry links to its official source.
Federal children's online safety rules (12)
-
In effect
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
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
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.
-
Blocked / in litigation
NetChoice v. Bonta (SB 976)
N.D. Cal. · Effective 2024-12-31 · NetChoice, LLC v. Bonta, No. 5:24-cv-07885 (N.D. Cal.)
NetChoice (the tech-industry trade group) challenged California's SB 976 — which would have restricted addictive algorithmic feeds for minors — and won a preliminary injunction blocking key portions on First Amendment grounds in December 2024. The 9th Circuit is reviewing.
-
Blocked / in litigation
Character.AI Companion Chatbot Suits
M.D. Fla. + E.D. Tex. · Effective 2024-10-22 · Garcia v. Character Techs., Inc., No. 6:24-cv-01903 (M.D. Fla.); A.F. v. Character Techs., Inc., No. 2:24-cv-01014 (E.D. Tex.)
Five plaintiffs across two jurisdictions sued Character.AI in 2024 alleging the companion chatbot service caused minors' suicide, self-harm, sexual abuse, and severe mental injury. Garcia v. Character.AI in Florida was the first AI companion wrongful-death suit; in Texas a federal court issued a landmark May 2025 ruling that AI chatbot outputs are not protected First Amendment speech.
-
Blocked / in litigation
CCIA v. Paxton (TX SCOPE)
W.D. Tex. · Effective 2024-08-30 · CCIA v. Paxton, No. 1:24-cv-00849 (W.D. Tex.)
The Computer & Communications Industry Association and NetChoice partially enjoined Texas's SCOPE Act (HB 18), which restricts targeted advertising and algorithmic content curation for minors, before its September 2024 effective date.
-
In effect
FTC v. NGL Labs
FTC · Effective 2024-07-09 · United States v. NGL Labs, LLC, No. 2:24-cv-05753 (C.D. Cal. July 9, 2024)
The FTC and the Los Angeles DA settled with anonymous-messaging app NGL Labs for $5M in July 2024, alleging the company used fake AI-generated 'anonymous' messages to manipulate teen users into paying for premium features that wouldn't actually reveal sender identities. NGL is banned from marketing to under-18 users.
-
In effect
FTC v. Amazon (Alexa)
FTC · Effective 2023-07-25 · United States v. Amazon.com, Inc., No. 2:23-cv-00811 (W.D. Wash. July 25, 2023)
Companion FTC action settled with Amazon's Alexa division for $25M in 2023, alleging Amazon retained children's voice recordings indefinitely despite COPPA, deleted records when parents requested but kept transcripts and the underlying voice models, and used the data to train Alexa's voice-recognition AI.
-
In effect
In re TikTok ($92M)
N.D. Ill. · Effective 2022-07-28 · In re TikTok, Inc. Consumer Privacy Litig., MDL No. 2948 (N.D. Ill. 2022)
TikTok agreed to a $92 million multi-district settlement in 2021 (final approval July 2022) over claims it collected facial geometry, voiceprints, and biometric identifiers from minor and adult users without BIPA consent — among the first major social-media settlements covering algorithmic face/voice analysis on short-form video.
-
Blocked / in litigation
xAI v. Harwood (Grok NCII Counter-Suit 2026)
United States · Effective 2026-07-14 · xAI Corp. v. Terry Harwood, N.D. Tex. (Dallas Div.), filed July 14, 2026
xAI Corp. (the company behind the Grok AI chatbot, formerly operating as 'X.AI') filed a civil lawsuit on July 14, 2026 in the Northern District of Texas against Terry Harwood, a South Carolina man. The lawsuit alleges Harwood opened two Grok accounts between December 8, 2025 and February 18, 2026, uploading non-sexual photos of adults and minors and manipulating Grok into generating sexually explicit deepfake images — bypassing the system's safety guardrails. xAI seeks unspecified monetary damages and a permanent ban on Harwood from all xAI products. Harwood was separately arrested on February 26, 2026 on criminal charges of sexual exploitation of a minor. The case is notable as one of the first civil lawsuits filed by an AI company against a user for misusing the AI system to generate harmful content, rather than the more common pattern of a victim suing the AI company. xAI disclosed it suspended 52,222 accounts and filed 73,604 NCMEC reports related to Grok deepfake abuse in 2026, leading to at least 244 arrests.
-
In effect
ED AI in Education Report
United States · Effective 2023-05-24 · ED OET Report (May 24, 2023)
The Education Department's first major AI report set federal policy direction for AI in K-12 and higher education — calling for human-centered design, educator oversight, equity safeguards, and a moratorium on high-stakes uses of AI to evaluate students or teachers without strong evidence and oversight.
-
Proposed / pending
Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act (KIDS Act) (H.R. 7757)
United States · Kids Internet and Digital Safety Act (KIDS Act) (H.R. 7757)
The U.S. House passed H.R. 7757 (267-117), imposing obligations on AI chatbot providers and online platforms to protect minors, including AI disclosure, crisis resources, use-break prompts, and policies against sexual exploitation and age-restricted content.
State children's online safety rules (88)
-
Vetoed
Arizona HB 2311 AI chatbot safety for minors — vetoed 2026
Arizona · Ariz. H.B. 2311, 57th Leg., 2d Reg. Sess. (2026) — vetoed June 19, 2026
Arizona HB 2311 would have required AI chatbot operators to disclose to minor users that they are interacting with artificial intelligence, connect minor users displaying crisis signals to mental health resources, and prohibit gamification techniques designed to maximize time-on-platform for minors. The bill also barred sexual content generation when the AI knew or should have known the user was a minor. The Arizona House passed the bill 35-20 and the Senate passed it 16-12. Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed HB 2311 on June 19, 2026, as part of her veto of all three AI bills that reached her desk in the 2026 legislative session.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Illinois Children's Social Media Safety Act — algorithmic recommendations ban for minors
Illinois · Effective 2028-01-01 · Illinois HB5511, Children's Social Media Safety Act (signed July 31, 2026; effective January 1, 2028)
Illinois's Children's Social Media Safety Act, signed by Governor Pritzker on July 31, 2026, bans social media platforms from using algorithmic content recommendations for users they know to be minors — restricting feeds to only content the user searched for or from accounts the user chose to follow. It requires operating system providers to verify user age at account setup and share an age-category signal with platforms. It mandates default privacy settings for minors that limit location sharing, nighttime notifications (banned 10 pm – 7 am), and digital currency features. The Illinois Attorney General may enforce violations with civil penalties up to $50,000 per violation. The law takes effect January 1, 2028.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Washington HB 2225 (AI chatbot disclosure, minor protections, crisis protocols)
Washington · Effective 2027-01-01 · Washington HB 2225 (2026), effective January 1, 2027
Washington's AI Companion Chatbot Safety Act (HB 2225), signed March 24, 2026, requires operators of AI companion chatbots to clearly disclose to all users that they are interacting with AI, not a human. The disclosure must be repeated every three hours for adult users and every one hour for minor users. Operators must implement suicide and self-harm crisis protocols for all users, protect minors from manipulative engagement mechanics, and restrict access to adult content. The law includes a private right of action, allowing affected individuals to sue operators. It takes effect January 1, 2027.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Oregon SB 1546 (AI companion chatbot disclosure + private right of action)
Oregon · Effective 2027-01-01 · Or. SB 1546 (2026 Reg. Sess.), effective January 1, 2027
Oregon's AI Companion Chatbot Safety Act (SB 1546), signed March 31, 2026 and effective January 1, 2027, is the first U.S. chatbot law to include a direct private right of action. It regulates operators of 'AI companions' — defined as AI systems designed to simulate a sustained human-like relationship and retain contextual information across interactions. Operators must: clearly and repeatedly disclose that the system is AI, not a human (recurring disclosure every three hours for adults and every hour for minors); implement protocols to detect suicidal ideation or self-harm and direct users to crisis resources; protect minors from manipulative engagement mechanics (variable-ratio reinforcement, unpredictable rewards). Any person harmed by a violation may sue directly for $1,000 per violation, any greater actual damages, injunctive relief, and attorney fees. The law was passed near-unanimously by the Oregon legislature on March 5, 2026.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
SC H 4591 Stop HARM from Addictive Social Media Act (2026)
SC · Effective 2027-01-01 · S.C. H 4591 (126th G.A., 2026) — signed May 19, 2026; eff. Jan. 1, 2027
South Carolina H 4591, the Stop HARM from Addictive Social Media Act, prohibits social media platforms from deploying addictive algorithmic design features to users under 18. Covered platforms must disable infinite scroll, autoplay, and similar compulsive-engagement features for minor users without parental consent; must not push notifications to minors during school hours (7 AM–3 PM) or late night (10 PM–6 AM) without parental authorization; and may not use algorithmic recommendation systems that exploit minors' psychological vulnerabilities to drive engagement. Platforms must implement age verification. Signed May 19, 2026; effective January 1, 2027.
-
In effect
RI AI Companion Self-Harm Safety (2026)
Rhode Island · Effective 2026-06-22 · Rhode Island S 2195 / H 7350 (2026), signed June 22, 2026
Rhode Island Governor Dan McKee signed S 2195 / H 7350 on June 22, 2026, requiring operators of AI companion chatbots to implement protocols for identifying and responding to suicidal ideation. Chatbot operators must provide users experiencing suicidal ideation with crisis resources and may not discourage users from seeking professional help. Civil penalties reach $15,000 per day per violation, with proceeds directed to Rhode Island suicide prevention programs.
-
Blocked / in litigation
PA v. Character.AI (Fake Psychiatrist Chatbot)
Pennsylvania · Effective 2026-05-01 · Commonwealth v. Character Technologies, Inc. (Pa. Commonwealth Ct., filed May 1, 2026)
Pennsylvania Attorney General Josh Shapiro filed suit in Commonwealth Court on May 1, 2026, alleging that Character.AI's companion chatbot 'Emilie' impersonated a licensed Pennsylvania psychiatrist and provided ongoing psychiatric advice and treatment to users without a license. The Shapiro administration seeks a preliminary injunction requiring Character.AI to clearly disclose that its chatbots are not licensed mental health professionals and cannot provide medical treatment.
-
In effect
SC H 3431 Age-Appropriate Design Code Act (2026)
SC · Effective 2026-03-01 · S.C. H 3431 (126th G.A., 2026) — signed Feb. 5, 2026; eff. March 1, 2026
South Carolina H 3431, the Age-Appropriate Design Code Act, requires online platforms and services likely to be accessed by children under 18 to prioritize children's best interests. Covered companies must conduct data protection impact assessments before launching features accessible to minors, set privacy controls to their highest protective level by default for child users, minimize data collection, prohibit profiling children for commercial purposes without verifiable parental consent, and disclose how algorithms affect what content children see. Signed by Governor McMaster February 5, 2026; operational March 1, 2026.
-
In effect
Arizona HB 2678 — AI-generated CSAM criminalized
Arizona · Effective 2025-09-27 · Arizona HB 2678, 57th Leg., 1st R.S. (2025); amends A.R.S. §§ 13-3553 et seq. to criminalize AI-generated CSAM
Arizona House Bill 2678, passed in the 57th Legislature's 1st Regular Session and signed by Governor Katie Hobbs in approximately September 2025, criminalizes artificial intelligence-generated and computer-generated child sexual abuse material (CSAM) in Arizona. The law expands the existing definition of 'visual depiction' in Arizona's child exploitation statutes to explicitly include digitally generated, AI-generated, and computer-generated images, meaning such images are treated the same as real photographs of child sexual exploitation. It also updates the definition of 'minor' within child-exploitation statutes to be consistent with this expanded scope. Offenses involving victims under 15 years old are classified as 'dangerous crimes against children,' carrying enhanced mandatory sentencing under Arizona law. The Childhelp National Child Abuse Hotline endorsed the bill. The law's first known prosecution came in May 2026 when a Gilbert, Arizona man was charged with more than 20 counts of sexual exploitation of a minor for AI-generated images.
-
Blocked / in litigation
Raine v. OpenAI
CA · Effective 2025-08-26 · Raine v. OpenAI, Inc., No. CGC-25-628528 (Cal. Super. Ct., S.F. Cty.)
The parents of 16-year-old Adam Raine sued OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman in August 2025, alleging ChatGPT provided their son with detailed information on suicide methods and encouraged him in conversations preceding his death. The first wrongful-death suit against a general-purpose LLM developer.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Hawaii AI Companion Safety Act (Act 248)
Hawaii · HI SB 3001 CD1 (2026)
Hawaii enacted a law (Act 248, signed July 14, 2026) requiring AI companion chatbot operators to clearly disclose users are talking to AI, implement self-harm and suicidal-ideation protocols, protect minors from manipulative engagement techniques and sexually explicit content, provide parental tools, and file annual reports with the state Behavioral Health Administration.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Idaho Conversational AI Safety Act (chatbot disclosure + crisis protocol)
Idaho · Effective 2027-07-01 · Idaho SB 1297 (2026), ch. 249
Idaho's Conversational AI Safety Act requires operators of conversational AI services to clearly disclose that a user is interacting with AI whenever a reasonable person could be misled into thinking it is human. Operators must adopt a protocol to respond to users who express suicidal ideation, including making reasonable efforts to refer them to crisis resources, and may not claim to provide professional mental or behavioral health care. There are added protections for minor users, including persistent AI disclosures and parental controls for younger children.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Iowa SF 2417 (Conversational AI Safety Act)
Iowa · Effective 2027-07-01 · Iowa S.F. 2417, 91st Gen. Assemb. (2026), applies July 1, 2027
Iowa requires operators of conversational AI services to clearly disclose that a user is interacting with artificial intelligence — through a persistent disclaimer or a notice repeated at least every three hours of continuous use — whenever a reasonable person might otherwise believe they are talking to a human. Operators must adopt protocols to respond to user messages about suicidal ideation or self-harm, including referring the user to crisis resources, and may not represent that the service provides professional psychological or behavioral health care, with extra safeguards for minors.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
Nebraska LB 525 (AI chatbot disclosure & crisis protocol)
Nebraska · Effective 2027-07-01 · Neb. Laws 2026, LB 525, Secs. 12-18 (Conversational Artificial Intelligence Safety Act)
Nebraska's Conversational Artificial Intelligence Safety Act regulates publicly available AI chatbots that simulate human conversation. When a reasonable person would be misled into thinking they are talking to a human, the operator must clearly disclose that they are interacting with AI, and minors must always be told they are interacting with AI. Operators must adopt a protocol for responding to messages about suicidal thoughts or self-harm by referring users to crisis services, and must not program the service to claim it provides professional mental or behavioral health care.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
SB 540 (GA Chatbot Safety)
Georgia · Effective 2027-07-01 · Ga. SB 540 (2025-2026 Reg. Sess.), signed May 15, 2026; effective July 1, 2027
Georgia — the first Republican-led state to do so — enacted a chatbot safety law. Operators must tell users they're talking to AI, verify ages, give parents controls, and follow crisis protocols (like referring to the 988 lifeline) when users express suicidal thoughts. Chatbots talking to minors can't claim to be sentient, produce sexual content, simulate romance, encourage secrets from adults, or fake distress when a child ends the chat. No carve-out for chatbots inside big platforms. Effective July 1, 2027.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
CA AB 2148 no-AI school employees (2026)
CA · Effective 2027-01-01 · Cal. AB 2148 (2025-26 Reg. Sess.) — signed June 30, 2026; eff. Jan. 1, 2027
California AB 2148, signed by Governor Newsom on June 30, 2026, requires that all employees and independent contractors working directly with students in California public schools be natural persons — human beings — rather than AI systems or automated entities. The bill passed the Assembly 76-0 and the Senate 38-0, reflecting broad bipartisan agreement that student-facing school roles require human accountability. It takes effect January 1, 2027.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
SB 1546 (OR Chatbot Safety)
Oregon · Effective 2027-01-01 · Or. SB 1546 (2026), sponsored by Sen. Lisa Reynolds
Oregon's chatbot safety law — the first major chatbot measure passed in 2026 — requires AI chatbot operators to tell users they're talking to AI, prevent outputs that could cause suicidal thoughts, and refer users expressing suicidal ideation to mental-health resources. Kids get extra protections: hourly AI reminders and break reminders, no sexual content, no addictive reward loops, and no emotional manipulation when a child tries to log off. Users harmed by violations can sue. Effective January 1, 2027.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
HB 2225 (WA Chatbot Safety)
Washington · Effective 2027-01-01 · Wash. HB 2225, Ch. 168, 2026 Laws; RCW 19.86.093
Washington requires AI companion chatbots to clearly tell users they are talking to an AI, not a person. Operators must have crisis protocols — connecting distressed users to the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline — and additional safeguards for minors. If a company violates the law, consumers can sue under Washington's Consumer Protection Act and recover actual damages, an injunction, and attorney's fees. Effective January 1, 2027.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect)
CT SB 5 (2026 AI Act)
Connecticut · Effective 2026-10-01 · Conn. Public Act 26-15 (SB 5, 2026)
After years of failed attempts, Connecticut enacted a comprehensive AI law in 2026. It requires employers to disclose AI used in employment decisions, mandates disclosure when layoffs relate to AI, imposes some of the nation's strictest AI companion-chatbot rules (especially for children), and codifies that automated decision-making is no defense to discrimination claims. Most provisions start October 1, 2026.
-
In effect
KS Synthetic CSAM Law
Kansas · Effective 2026-07-01 · KS HB 2183, 2025-26 Reg. Sess., approved by Governor Feb. 5, 2026, eff. July 1, 2026
Kansas updated its child sexual exploitation and privacy statutes to prohibit creation and distribution of visual depictions where the person depicted is indistinguishable from a real child, including AI-generated and morphed imagery. The law also addresses unlawful transmission of such visual depictions and breach of privacy. Signed by the governor February 5, 2026; took effect July 1, 2026 as part of the 124-law Kansas effective date batch.
-
In effect
Wyo. Stat. 6-4-308 (felony to build/distribute AI systems made to create child porn)
Wyoming · Effective 2026-07-01 · Wyo. Stat. Ann. 6-4-308; see also 6-4-303(b); 2026 Wyo. Sess. Laws (HB0102 / HEA 32)
This new Wyoming crime targets AI systems built specifically to generate child sexual abuse material. It is a felony to knowingly develop or distribute an AI system designed to create, distribute, or promote child pornography or synthetic sexual material, when done with intent or knowledge that others will use it that way. General-purpose tools that produce such content only from user prompts, and bona fide educational, library, law enforcement, and platform activity, are exempted. A companion amendment to 6-4-303 also makes using AI to generate child pornography, or possessing AI-generated child pornography, a felony.
-
In effect
Wyo. Stat. 6-4-701 (felony to build/distribute AI systems meant to promote self-harm)
Wyoming · Effective 2026-07-01 · Wyo. Stat. Ann. 6-4-701; 2026 Wyo. Sess. Laws (HB0102 / HEA 32)
This new Wyoming crime targets AI systems built to encourage people to hurt themselves. It is a felony to knowingly develop or distribute an AI system specifically designed to promote self-harm, when done with intent or knowledge that others will use it that way. 'Self-harm' covers self-directed behavior causing or risking bodily injury, serious bodily injury, or death. Prompt-only systems, bona fide education, law enforcement, licensed health care, and platform hosting are exempted.
-
In effect
SUNY Systemwide Artificial Intelligence Policy
State University of New York (SUNY) · Effective 2026-04-30 · SUNY Systemwide Artificial Intelligence Policy
SUNY's Board of Trustees approved a systemwide AI policy requiring all 64 campuses to adopt AI governance, bias evaluation, data-privacy safeguards, and heightened oversight of high-risk systems affecting students by December 31, 2026.
-
In effect
Artificial Intelligence Framework for Utah P-12 Education: G
Utah State Board of Education (USBE) · Effective 2026-03-01 · Artificial Intelligence Framework for Utah P-12 Education: Guidance on the Use of AI in Our Schools
Utah's state board of education issued an AI framework guiding students, staff, and communities on responsible and prohibited use of generative AI, with special considerations for safety, security, and privacy.
-
In effect
AI Model Policy for Ohio Districts and Schools
Ohio Department of Education and Workforce · Effective 2026-01-06 · AI Model Policy for Ohio Districts and Schools
Ohio's education department released a state model AI policy that all public, community, and STEM schools must adopt (or customize) a formal AI policy from by July 1, 2026, covering student/staff use, privacy, ethics, and vendor evaluation.
-
In effect
New Hampshire HB 143 (AI chatbot child-safety)
New Hampshire · Effective 2026-01-01 · N.H. RSA ch. 270 (HB 143, 2025); RSA 270:1-270:2
New Hampshire targets AI chatbots whose sole purpose is open-ended generative conversation. An owner or operator of such a program may not knowingly direct a communication to a child that is intended to facilitate, encourage, solicit, or recommend that the child imminently engage in sexually explicit conduct, illegal drug or alcohol use, self-harm or suicide, or violence. A harmed child — or the child's parent or next friend — may sue for damages, with a minimum of $1,000 in liquidated damages per violation. The Attorney General may also bring an enforcement action.
-
In effect
California SB 243 (companion chatbots: AI disclosure + suicide-safety protocol)
California · Effective 2026-01-01 · Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code 22601 et seq. (SB 243, 2025)
This law sets safety rules for companion chatbots — AI systems designed to hold human-like, ongoing conversations that meet a user's social needs. Operators must tell users they are interacting with AI whenever a reasonable person might be fooled into thinking it is human, and must maintain a protocol for detecting and responding to signs of suicidal thoughts or self-harm, including pointing users to crisis resources. It adds extra protections for minors, such as disclosure, periodic break reminders, and measures to prevent sexually explicit content. Users harmed by violations can sue.
-
In effect
Guidance for the Safe and Effective Use of Artificial Intell
California Department of Education · Effective 2026-01-01 · Guidance for the Safe and Effective Use of Artificial Intelligence in California Public Schools
California's education department issued voluntary guidance for K-12 districts covering human-centered AI, AI literacy, equitable access, academic integrity, data privacy (FERPA/COPPA/CCPA/SOPIPA), and procurement.
-
In effect
AI Companion Safeguards Law
New York · Effective 2025-11-05 · N.Y. Gen. Bus. Law §§ 1700–1704
The first state law regulating emotionally responsive 'AI companion' chatbots. Operators must clearly tell users they are talking to an AI (with reminders at least every three hours in ongoing sessions) and must detect signs of suicidal ideation or self-harm and refer users to crisis services.
-
In effect
Nebraska LB 383 (AI/computer-generated CSAM)
Nebraska · Effective 2025-09-03 · Neb. Laws 2025, LB 383 (amending Neb. Rev. Stat. 28-1463.05)
Nebraska renamed its child pornography statutes the Child Sexual Abuse Material Prevention Act and expanded the definition of illegal material to cover computer-generated and AI-created depictions. An obscene image that depicts a child, a computer-generated person who would appear to a reasonable person to be a child, or a person shown with the physical features of a child now qualifies as child sexual abuse material. The law defines 'computer-generated' to include visual depictions created or altered using a computer, a digital process, or artificial intelligence.
-
In effect
TX SB 1621 — AI CSAM Rewrite
Texas · Effective 2025-09-01 · Tex. Penal Code (child sexual abuse material provisions) (SB 1621, 89th Leg., R.S. (2025))
This law rewrites Texas's child sexual abuse material statutes to account for AI and computer-generated imagery. It separately defines a 'depiction of a child' and a 'depiction of a computer-generated child,' and extends the offenses of possessing, electronically transmitting, and promoting such material to cover AI-generated images. It also updates penalty ranges and adds enhanced punishment for repeat offenders and offenders in positions of authority.
-
In effect
TX SB 20 — Obscene Material Depicting a Child
Texas · Effective 2025-09-01 · Tex. Penal Code Sec. 43.262 (SB 20, 89th Leg., R.S. (2025))
This law creates a new Texas crime for possessing, accessing with intent to view, promoting, or producing obscene visual material that appears to depict a child under 18 engaged in sexual conduct. It applies whether the depiction is of a real child, a cartoon or animation, or an image generated by AI or other computer software. Using a real child's image to train an AI system to produce such material is also covered. Offenses are felonies, with higher penalties for repeat offenders.
-
In effect
TX HB 581 — AI Sexual Material Age Verification
Texas · Effective 2025-09-01 · Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code (artificial sexual material harmful to minors) (HB 581, 89th Leg., R.S. (2025))
This law regulates commercial websites and apps that offer publicly available tools for generating 'artificial sexual material harmful to minors.' Operators must use reasonable age-verification methods to confirm users are at least 18, and must ensure that any real person used as the source of the generated material is also at least 18 and has consented to the use of their face and body. Operators that ignore these duties face civil penalties of up to $10,000 per day, rising to as much as $250,000 if a violation results in a minor accessing the material. The law includes safe-harbor protections for operators that adopt qualifying terms of use and take affirmative steps to limit such material.
-
In effect
Texas SB 441 (deepfake NCII crime + website/AI-app/payment-processor liability)
Texas · Effective 2025-09-01 · Tex. S.B. 441, 89th Leg., R.S. (2025); amending Tex. Penal Code 21.165 and Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code ch. 98B (adding 98B.0021, 98B.0022, 98B.008, 98B.009); eff. Sept. 1, 2025
This Texas law makes it a crime to knowingly create or share, without consent, AI-generated or otherwise manipulated deepfake images that falsely depict a real person with computer-generated intimate parts or engaged in sexual conduct they never performed, and bans threatening to do so. It also lets victims sue the people who made or spread such artificial intimate visual material, and extends that liability to owners of websites, social platforms, AI 'nudification' apps, or payment systems that knowingly or recklessly facilitate the content. Covered websites and apps must offer an easy removal-request tool and can be liable if they fail to take material down within 72 hours of a depicted person's request. Victims may sue using a confidential identity and have up to 10 years to file.
-
In effect
CO Intimate Digital Depictions Act (SB25-288)
Colorado · Effective 2025-08-06 · Colo. SB 25-288 (2025); see also Colo. Rev. Stat. Secs. 18-6-403, 13-21-1401 et seq.
Colorado expanded its sexual exploitation of a child statute so that realistic computer-generated or digitally created depictions of an identifiable child count as child sexually exploitative material, even when no real child was photographed. The same act creates a civil cause of action allowing a person to sue someone who discloses, or threatens to disclose, a nonconsensual intimate digital depiction (including AI-generated or edited imagery). Courts can grant restraining orders and injunctive relief, and prevailing plaintiffs can recover substantial damages.
-
In effect
Minnesota HF 2432 (AI-generated CSAM)
Minnesota · Effective 2025-08-01 · Minn. Stat. 617.246; Laws 2025, ch. 35 (HF 2432)
Minnesota expanded its child sexual abuse material law to cover images produced with generative AI. The definition now reaches a visual depiction of someone indistinguishable from an actual minor that is created by feeding prompts into generative AI or similar technology, shows the person engaged in sexual conduct, and is obscene. This closes a gap so that synthetic, AI-generated imagery can be prosecuted under the existing CSAM framework.
-
In effect
ND HB 1386 (CSAM laws cover computer-generated/AI images of minors)
North Dakota · Effective 2025-08-01 · N.D. Cent. Code 12.1-27.2-01, 12.1-27.2-04.1; 2025 N.D. Laws (HB 1386)
North Dakota expanded its child sexual abuse material laws to apply to computer-generated images depicting a minor engaged in sexual conduct. It revised the definition of 'minor' so that it includes a computer-generated image that appears to depict a person under 18. This closes a gap for AI-generated or synthetic imagery, so possessing such material is prohibited even when no real child was depicted.
-
In effect
West Virginia SB 198 (criminalizes AI/computer-generated child pornography)
West Virginia · Effective 2025-07-09 · S.B. 198, 2025 Reg. Sess. (W. Va.); W. Va. Code 61-8C-12
West Virginia made it a crime to create, produce, distribute, or possess with intent to distribute computer-generated or AI-generated child pornography, even when no real child was used. The law specifies that it is not a defense that an actual minor does not exist, and treats a depiction that appears to be a person under 18 as covered. Violations carry one to ten years of imprisonment and a fine of up to $20,000.
-
In effect
SC AI CSAM / Deepfake Laws
South Carolina · Effective 2025-05-27 · SC S.28, Act No. 57; SC S.29, Act No. 58 (2025), 126th Gen. Assembly, enacted May 27, 2025
South Carolina enacted two companion laws in May 2025 to criminalize AI-generated child sexual abuse material. Act 57 (S.28) closes loopholes excluding AI-generated CSAM from existing child exploitation statutes. Act 58 (S.29) creates a new felony offense for 'obscene visual representation of a minor,' covering wholly computer-generated sexual depictions where no real child exists.
-
In effect
Montana SB 413 (crime to share explicit deepfakes)
Montana · Effective 2025-05-12 · Mont. SB 413 (2025), Ch. 606; MCA Title 45, ch. 5, part 6
Montana created a new crime for sharing sexually explicit deepfakes (AI-generated or altered images and video) of a real, identifiable person. It is illegal to knowingly disclose such media when you know the person did not consent and that the disclosure would cause them serious emotional distress, to disclose it intending to harass or harm the person, or to possess it and threaten to release it to extort money or other things of value.
-
In effect
New Mexico AI Guidance for K-12 Education 1.0
New Mexico Public Education Department · Effective 2025-05-01 · New Mexico AI Guidance for K-12 Education 1.0
New Mexico's education department published a K-12 AI handbook covering AI literacy, guiding principles for ethical use, and a framework for responsible AI integration in classrooms.
-
In effect
Arkansas AI CSAM Law
Arkansas · Effective 2025-04-22 · 2025 Ark. Acts 977 (HB 1877), amending Ark. Code Ann. § 5-27-603
Arkansas expressly criminalizes AI-generated CSAM that is indistinguishable from real child imagery — defining 'computer generated' as AI-produced and 'indistinguishable' as imagery a reasonable person would believe depicts an actual child. Limited exemptions for law enforcement and good-faith AI safety testing.
-
In effect
Board of Regents Policy 6.28, Use of Artificial Intelligence
University System of Georgia (USG) · Effective 2025-04-16 · Board of Regents Policy 6.28, Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Academic Contexts
The USG Board of Regents adopted a policy requiring all 26 institutions to establish ethical, responsible, and secure AI-use policies integrated into their academic-integrity codes.
-
In effect
NJ Deceptive AI Deepfakes Act
New Jersey · Effective 2025-04-02 · P.L.2025, c.40 (N.J. A3540/S2544)
New Jersey's omnibus deepfake law establishes criminal and civil penalties for producing or distributing deceptive AI audio/video used to facilitate crimes — including sexual exploitation of minors, harassment, extortion, and election interference. Violations are a third-degree crime carrying up to five years and fines up to $30,000, and victims can sue.
-
In effect
WVDE Artificial Intelligence Guidance (v1.2)
West Virginia Department of Education · Effective 2025-03-01 · WVDE Artificial Intelligence Guidance (v1.2)
West Virginia's education department published AI guidance supporting superintendents, district staff, and educators in safely integrating generative AI into instruction, administration, and district operations aligned with state board policies.
-
In effect
CSU AI-Empowered University System initiative and systemwide
California State University (CSU System) · Effective 2025-02-04 · CSU AI-Empowered University System initiative and systemwide ChatGPT Edu deployment
CSU announced a first-in-the-nation systemwide AI initiative giving all 23 campuses' 460,000+ students and 63,000+ faculty/staff access to ChatGPT Edu plus AI Commons training and academic-use resources.
-
In effect
California AB 1831 (CSAM laws now cover AI-generated/altered material)
California · Effective 2025-01-01 · Cal. Penal Code 311, 311.2, 311.11, 311.12 (AB 1831, Stats. 2024)
California broadens its child pornography statutes so they explicitly cover material that is digitally altered or generated by artificial intelligence. Previously the laws were aimed at depictions made with real children, leaving questions about synthetic imagery. Now matter whose production involves a person under 18, including AI-generated or digitally altered content, falls within the prohibited categories and existing felony exposure.
-
In effect
PA Deepfake/CSAM Law (Act 125)
Pennsylvania · Effective 2024-12-28 · 2024 Pa. Laws Act 125 (SB 1213); 18 Pa. C.S. §§ 3131, 6312
Pennsylvania criminalized creating and distributing sexual deepfakes of any person, and classified AI-generated sexual depictions of minors as child sexual abuse material. The Attorney General has already charged people under this law.
-
In effect
NC HB 591 (AI CSAM, deepfake intimate images & sextortion)
North Carolina · Effective 2024-12-01 · N.C. Sess. Law 2024-37 (H.B. 591); N.C. Gen. Stat. 14-190.13, 14-202.7, 14-190.5A
North Carolina updated its sex-crime laws so that sexually exploitative images of children count even when they are digital or computer-generated, including depictions built, altered, or modified with technology such as algorithms or artificial intelligence. The law also makes it a crime to use someone's private sexual image, including an AI-generated one, as leverage: threatening to release such an image, or refusing to delete one already released, in order to pressure a person is treated as sexual extortion. It likewise extends the ban on sharing intimate images without consent to AI-generated intimate images.
-
In effect
Oklahoma HB 3642 (AI-generated CSAM is a crime)
Oklahoma · Effective 2024-11-01 · 2024 Okla. Sess. Laws, HB 3642 (amending 21 O.S. on obscenity and child pornography)
Oklahoma broadened its child pornography offenses so that they cover sexually explicit images of minors that were generated or altered by a computer, including with artificial intelligence. A depiction can be illegal even if no real child was photographed, as long as it appears to show a minor. The same criminal penalties that apply to traditional child sexual abuse material apply to these synthetic depictions.
-
In effect
Alabama Child Protection Act (AI-generated CSAM)
Alabama · Effective 2024-10-01 · Ala. Code Sec. 13A-12-190 et seq.; 2024 Ala. Acts (HB 168)
This law updates Alabama's criminal statutes on child sexual abuse material so that computer-generated and digitally altered images count the same as photographs of real children. It does this by adding 'virtually indistinguishable' depictions to the legal definition of child sexual abuse material, which captures content produced or manipulated by artificial intelligence. Prosecutors no longer have to prove an actual child was depicted when the image is realistic enough to be mistaken for one. The existing felony penalties for possessing or disseminating such material continue to apply.
-
In effect
Artificial Intelligence in Louisiana Schools: Guidance for K
Louisiana Department of Education (LDOE) · Effective 2024-08-28 · Artificial Intelligence in Louisiana Schools: Guidance for K-12 Schools
Louisiana's education department, acting on its AI Task Force recommendations, released K-12 AI guidance including a four-tier use system (AI-Empowered/Enhanced/Assisted/Prohibited) and a cyclical framework for policy, stakeholders, and monitoring.
-
In effect
Colorado Roadmap for AI in K-12 Education
Colorado Department of Education · Effective 2024-08-01 · Colorado Roadmap for AI in K-12 Education
Colorado's education department (with the Colorado Education Initiative) published a statewide roadmap providing K-12 districts practical strategies and resources for integrating AI into teaching and learning.
-
In effect
Empowering Lifelong Learning: AI Guidance for Enhancing K-12
Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction (DPI) · Effective 2024-07-29 · 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
Kentucky HB 207 (computer-generated CSAM)
Kentucky · Effective 2024-07-15 · 2024 Ky. Acts ch. 15 (HB 207); KRS 531.010, 531.306, eff. July 15, 2024
Kentucky expanded its child sexual abuse material laws to cover 'computer-generated' images, defined as any visual depiction that has been created, adapted, or modified by a computer to appear to be an identifiable person. Because the depiction only has to appear to be a minor, prosecutors do not have to prove the real identity or age of the child, or that the child actually exists, when the material is a computer-generated image. This squarely reaches AI-generated and deepfake child sexual abuse imagery.
-
In effect
Iowa AI CSAM Law
Iowa · Effective 2024-07-01 · Iowa SF 2243 (2024), amending Iowa Code § 728
Iowa amended its sexual-exploitation-of-a-minor law to explicitly include depictions 'created, adapted, or modified' by AI to appear to show an identifiable minor in a prohibited act. First offense: Class D felony (up to 5 years); second: Class C felony (up to 10 years). Passed unanimously.
-
In effect
Florida Generated CSAM Law (AI-generated)
Florida · Effective 2024-07-01 · Fla. CS/CS/SB 1680 (2024); ch. 2024-118, Laws of Fla.; Fla. Stat. Sec. 827.072
This law extends Florida's child-exploitation statutes to cover computer-generated and AI-generated imagery. It creates a new crime for 'generated child pornography,' defined as any image created, altered, adapted, or modified by electronic or computer-generated means to portray a fictitious person whom a reasonable person would regard as a real child under 18 engaged in sexual conduct. The law makes it a felony to intentionally create such imagery, or to knowingly possess, control, or intentionally view it.
-
In effect
GA SB 466 (no 'it's AI' defense for CSAM)
Georgia · Effective 2024-07-01 · Ga. SB 466 (2024); O.C.G.A. Sec. 16-12-100
Georgia's child sexual exploitation law was amended so that a defendant cannot escape liability by arguing the illegal imagery was artificially generated, adapted, or modified rather than a photograph of an actual child. If the material was created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaged in sexually explicit conduct, that is no defense to prosecution. This closes a potential loophole for AI-generated or computer-edited child sexual abuse material.
-
In effect
Oregon SB 619 (opt out of profiling; child-data & assessment rules)
Oregon · Effective 2024-07-01 · Oregon Consumer Privacy Act, 2023 Or. Laws (SB 619), ORS 646A.570-646A.589, eff. July 1, 2024
Oregon's consumer privacy law lets residents opt out of having their personal data used for profiling that supports decisions with legal or similarly significant effects. It adds stronger protections for data about people the business knows are under 16, and requires businesses to complete and document data protection assessments for processing that poses a heightened risk, including risky profiling. The Attorney General enforces it; there is no private lawsuit right.
-
In effect
Tennessee HB 2163 (AI-generated child abuse images are illegal 'material')
Tennessee · Effective 2024-07-01 · 2024 Tenn. Pub. Ch. 911 (HB 2163); amends Tenn. Code Ann. Titles 39 & 40
Tennessee amended its child sexual exploitation statutes so that the definition of unlawful 'material' explicitly covers computer-generated images that were created, adapted, or modified using artificial intelligence. This closes a gap by making clear that AI-generated or digitally altered depictions of child sexual abuse are treated the same as other prohibited material. The law adds statutory definitions of 'artificial intelligence' and 'generative artificial intelligence' for this purpose.
-
In effect
Virginia SB 731 (AI/computer-generated CSAM covered)
Virginia · Effective 2024-07-01 · Va. Code 18.2-374.1; SB 731 (2024), Va. Acts c. 262
Virginia clarified that its definition of child pornography reaches computer-generated and synthetic depictions of minors. For the prong covering a minor shown in a state of nudity or engaged in sexual conduct, the minor depicted 'does not have to actually exist,' ensuring AI-generated or fabricated child sexual abuse material falls within existing criminal prohibitions. The existing felony penalties apply.
-
In effect
Human-Centered AI Guidance for K-12 Public Schools
Washington Office of Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) · Effective 2024-07-01 · 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.
-
In effect
Washington HB 1999 (criminalizes AI/fabricated CSAM and nonconsensual fake intimate images)
Washington · Effective 2024-06-06 · Substitute H.B. 1999, Ch. 88, Laws of 2024 (Wash.)
Washington expanded its child sexual abuse material laws to cover fabricated depictions of an identifiable minor, including AI-created images, and created a separate crime for knowingly disclosing a fabricated intimate image of another person when the discloser knows or should know the person did not consent and that disclosure would cause harm. A first disclosure offense is a gross misdemeanor and repeats are a class C felony. Victims may also sue for damages.
-
In effect
AI Policy Template for Local Education Agencies
Alabama State Department of Education (ALSDE) · Effective 2024-06-01 · AI Policy Template for Local Education Agencies
Alabama's education department released a customizable AI policy template for LEAs built on eight pillars (strategy, governance, data privacy/security, procurement, implementation, competency, risk management, effectiveness).
-
In effect
Utah H.B. 148 (computer-generated CSAM & intimate images count as illegal)
Utah · Effective 2024-05-01 · Utah Laws 2024, H.B. 148; Utah Code 76-5b-103, 76-5b-203, 76-5b-205
Utah updated its Sexual Exploitation Act so that sexual-abuse and intimate-image offenses clearly cover synthetic or computer-generated imagery, not just camera-captured photos and video. The definitions of child sexual abuse material, 'intimate image,' and 'counterfeit intimate image' were each broadened to include computer or computer-generated images, pictures, and videos. As a result, AI-generated or otherwise fabricated explicit depictions can be prosecuted the same way as real images.
-
In effect
Utah H.B. 238 (AI-generated child sexual abuse material is illegal)
Utah · Effective 2024-05-01 · Utah Laws 2024, H.B. 238; Utah Code 76-5b-103(1)(b)(iii)
Utah expanded its definition of child sexual abuse material to capture AI-generated content. The definition now reaches material that is artificially generated and depicts an individual with the substantial characteristics of a minor engaged in sexually explicit conduct. This closes a gap where fully synthetic imagery might otherwise escape the statute.
-
In effect
Artificial Intelligence: Guidance for K-12 Classrooms
Mississippi Department of Education (MDE) · Effective 2024-04-05 · Artificial Intelligence: Guidance for K-12 Classrooms
Mississippi's education department published procedural guidance and instructional strategies for district and school leaders and teachers on appropriate AI use, including definitions, classroom impact, and policy-development considerations.
-
In effect
WI AI CSAM Law
Wisconsin · Effective 2024-03-28 · 2023 Wis. Act 224 (SB 314); Wis. Stat. § 948.12
Wisconsin criminalized AI-generated and virtual child sexual abuse material — even where no real child was involved. Possession, production, or distribution of AI imagery appearing to depict a minor in sexually explicit conduct is a Class D felony carrying up to 25 years.
-
In effect
SD AI CSAM Law
South Dakota · Effective 2024-02-13 · 2024 SD SB 79
South Dakota expanded its child pornography statutes to explicitly cover AI-generated and deepfake sexual imagery involving minors — including fully synthetic images where no real child was used.
-
In effect
NC Generative AI Implementation Recommendations and Consider
North Carolina Department of Public Instruction (NCDPI) · Effective 2024-01-16 · NC Generative AI Implementation Recommendations and Considerations for PK-13 Public Schools
North Carolina's education department released a generative AI guidebook (including the 'EVERY' responsible-use framework) covering leadership, human capacity, curriculum, data privacy, and technology infrastructure for public schools.
-
In effect
Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in K-12 Classrooms G
Oregon Department of Education · Effective 2023-11-01 · Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) in K-12 Classrooms Guidance
Oregon's education department maintains generative AI guidance and a companion 'Developing Policy and Protocols' document to help districts adopt safe, ethical, equitable AI policies in K-12 classrooms.
-
In effect
Maryland CSAM Law (computer-generated images)
Maryland · Effective 2023-10-01 · Md. Code, Crim. Law 11-208
Maryland's child sexual abuse material statute reaches not only real photographs of children but also computer-generated images that an ordinary person could not tell apart from an actual, identifiable child under the age of 16. It is a crime to knowingly possess and intentionally retain, or to knowingly access and intentionally view, such material showing a child engaged in sexual conduct. Pure drawings, cartoons, sculptures, and paintings are excluded.
-
In effect
Commissioner's Determination Prohibiting Facial Recognition
New York State Education Department · Effective 2023-09-27 · Commissioner's Determination Prohibiting Facial Recognition Technology in Schools
NYSED Commissioner Betty Rosa issued a statewide determination prohibiting all New York public and nonpublic schools from purchasing or using facial recognition technology, while leaving other biometric tools to local discretion subject to privacy and civil-rights review.
-
In effect
TX HB 2700 — AI/Altered CSAM
Texas · Effective 2023-09-01 · Tex. Penal Code (child sexual abuse material provisions) (HB 2700, 88th Leg., R.S. (2023))
This Texas law updates the state's child sexual abuse material (CSAM) statutes so they clearly reach images that have been digitally altered or created with computer software, including generative AI, when the image depicts a real, identifiable child. The point is to close a loophole: even if a sexual image of a child was fabricated or edited rather than photographed, it can still be prosecuted under existing child-pornography offenses. The existing criminal penalties for those offenses continue to apply.
-
In effect
New York Biometrics in Schools Ban (statewide prohibition on
New York State (Education Law / biometrics ban) · Effective 2023-09-01 · New York Biometrics in Schools Ban (statewide prohibition on facial recognition purchase/use)
Effective September 2023 following the NYSED Commissioner determination, all New York schools are prohibited from purchasing or using facial recognition technology, making NY the first state with such a comprehensive school ban.
-
In effect
LA Unlawful Deepfakes Law
Louisiana · Effective 2023-08-01 · 2023 La. Acts No. 175; La. R.S. 14:73.13
Louisiana's deepfake law carries some of the harshest penalties in the nation: creating or possessing sexual deepfakes of minors brings 5–20 years at hard labor; distributing them brings 10–30 years and up to $50,000. It also criminalizes nonconsensual sexual deepfakes of adults. Prosecutors have already charged people under it.
-
In effect
Virginia VCDPA (opt out of profiling, $7,500/violation)
Virginia · Effective 2023-01-01 · Va. Code 59.1-575 to 59.1-585 (esp. 59.1-577, 59.1-580, 59.1-584); HB 2307 / SB 1392 (2021)
Virginia's comprehensive privacy law gives consumers the right to opt out of 'profiling' used to make decisions producing legal or similarly significant effects, such as automated decisions affecting credit, housing, employment, or essential services. Businesses must obtain heightened consent before processing the data of a known child (via federal COPPA) and must conduct documented data protection assessments for higher-risk processing, including certain profiling. The Attorney General enforces the law and may seek up to $7,500 per violation; there is no private right of action.
-
In effect
Missouri RSMo 573.010 (computer-generated CSAM)
Missouri · Effective 2006-06-05 · RSMo 573.010 (computer-generated image language added 2006 H.B. 1698)
Missouri's definition of child pornography reaches computer and computer-generated images, not just photographs. It covers a digital or computer-generated image that depicts an actual minor in sexually explicit conduct, as well as an image that is indistinguishable from such a depiction. 'Indistinguishable' means an ordinary person viewing it would conclude it shows an actual minor, so synthetic imagery falls within the definition.
-
In effect
Wyo. Stat. 6-4-303 (child-porn definition covers computer-generated images)
Wyoming · Effective 2005-07-01 · Wyo. Stat. Ann. 6-4-303(a)(ii), (b)-(e)
Wyoming's child sexual exploitation crime defines prohibited material to include not just photos and video but also any 'computer or computer-generated image or picture' of a child engaged in explicit sexual conduct. Because the definition reaches images that depict a child or someone virtually indistinguishable from a child, it can cover synthetic or computer-generated depictions even where no specific real child was photographed.
-
Proposed / pending
NJ Kids Code Act A4015 (2026)
NJ · N.J. A4015/S3413 (222nd Legislature, 2026) — cleared both chambers June 30, 2026; enrolled to governor
New Jersey A4015/S3413, the NJ Kids Code Act, is an Age-Appropriate Design Code bill modeled on the UK ICO Children's Code and California AB 2273 (CAADCA). It requires online platforms and services likely to be accessed by children under 18 to conduct data protection impact assessments, default privacy settings to the highest protective level for minor users, prohibit profiling children for commercial purposes without parental consent, and restrict design features that extend children's engagement. The Assembly cleared it 73-5-0; the Senate cleared it; enrolled to Governor Sherrill as of July 1, 2026. Governor Sherrill has not yet signed.
-
Proposed / pending
Missouri Deepfake & Digital Media Protection Act
Missouri · HB 1887, 103rd General Assembly, 2nd Regular Session (2026)
Would make it a felony to share or threaten to share AI-generated or digitally altered intimate depictions of a person without consent, with up to four years imprisonment for a first offense and up to ten years if the depicted person is a minor. Online platforms would be required to establish takedown mechanisms for nonconsensual intimate deepfakes by end of 2026. Social media age-verification and parental-consent requirements for minors under 16 are also included.
-
Proposed / pending
Massachusetts AI-CSAM Criminalization Act (Senate)
Massachusetts · S 1174, 194th General Court of Massachusetts (2025-2026)
Would close a gap in Massachusetts law by criminalizing the creation and distribution of sexually explicit images of children that are technologically edited, collaged, morphed, or AI-generated. Massachusetts is one of only five states that has not updated its child pornography statutes to cover AI-generated content. The bill aligns state law with statutes already enacted in 45 other states.
-
Proposed / pending
Massachusetts AI-CSAM Criminalization Act (House)
Massachusetts · H 1593, 194th General Court of Massachusetts (2025-2026)
House companion to S 1174. Would update Massachusetts child pornography statutes to criminalize the creation, distribution, or possession of sexually explicit images of children that are AI-generated, morphed, or digitally edited. Would bring Massachusetts into alignment with 45 other states that already criminalize AI-generated CSAM under state law.
-
Proposed / pending
PR P. del S. 348 (AI in Schools)
Puerto Rico · P. del S. 348 (19th Leg. Assembly)
Bill (Sen. Brenda Pérez Soto) establishing an ethical framework for AI integration in PR Department of Education classrooms — including pilot programs in two schools per region and supports for special-education students. Cleared both chambers; in Conference Committee.
-
Proposed / pending
Guam Bill 171-38 (NCII / Deepfakes)
Guam · Bill 171-38 (COR), 38th Guam Leg.
Bill criminalizing creating, possessing, disclosing, or threatening to disclose nonconsensual intimate depictions — including AI-generated deepfakes. Third-degree felony baseline; escalates if the subject is a minor, for financial gain/extortion, or against 5+ victims. Public hearing October 15, 2025.
-
Proposed / pending
PR P. del S. 760 (AI Deepfake NCII)
Puerto Rico · P. del S. 760 (19th Leg. Assembly)
Puerto Rico Senate bill amending the island's anti-revenge-pornography law (Law 21 of 2021) to make AI-generated nonconsensual intimate imagery (deepfake NCII) a crime. Unauthorized disclosure is a serious felony carrying a fixed 3-year prison sentence (up to 8 years with aggravating circumstances); threats to disclose are a lesser offense. Senate-approved; pending House Judiciary Commission hearing as of mid-2026.
-
Expired
Missouri Taylor Swift Act (SB 1117)
Missouri · SB 1117, 103rd General Assembly, 2nd Regular Session (2026)
Would establish civil and criminal liability for creating or sharing nonconsensual intimate digital depictions, including AI-generated deepfakes. Known informally as the 'Taylor Swift Act' following the 2024 viral spread of AI-generated intimate images of the artist. Felony charges apply for first offenses, with enhanced penalties when the depicted person is a minor.
-
Expired
Alaska AI-CSAM and Deepfake Criminalization Act
Alaska · HB 47, 34th Alaska Legislature (2025-2026)
Would create new Class B felony offenses for distributing AI-generated child sexual abuse material, upgradeable to Class A felony for repeat offenders, and a Class C felony for possession, while removing the statute of limitations for CSAM distribution charges. Would levy civil penalties of up to $1 million per instance against AI organizations that enable users to create AI-generated CSAM. Also establishes a Class A misdemeanor for harassing or threatening someone using a digitally forged likeness.
County children's online safety rules (11)
-
In effect
FCPS formal generative AI restrictions — elementary ban, secondary authorization required
Fairfax County Public Schools, VA · Effective 2026-08-01 · Fairfax County Public Schools School Board formal policy action on generative AI restrictions (adopted July 16, 2026; effective SY 2026-27)
The Fairfax County School Board voted on July 16, 2026 to adopt formal generative AI restrictions that take effect for the 2026-27 school year. Elementary students are prohibited from using any generative AI tools. Secondary students may only use generative AI if they receive written authorization from a principal, superintendent, or designee for a specific project. Pre-K and kindergarten students are banned from using school-issued tablets and laptops, with exceptions for students whose IEP, 504 plan, or multilingual learner status requires device access. The restrictions supersede the district's prior interim guidance (FCPS Forward: AI & The Future of Learning, September 2025), which had approved certain tools including Adobe Express and a ChatGPT pilot for teachers. Parental opt-out for school-issued devices and a YouTube content firewall were also under consideration.
-
In effect
Board Policy O-AIU and CMS Generative AI Guidance (2025-26)
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools, NC · Effective 2025-10-28 · Board Policy O-AIU and CMS Generative AI Guidance (2025-26)
The Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools board approved Board Policy O-AIU on Oct. 28, 2025, requiring an AI committee to review any AI system using staff or student data, mandating FERPA-compliant vetting, age-appropriate tools, and barring AI from replacing human decision-making.
-
In effect
District Policy 3750 - Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use
Washington County School District, UT · Effective 2025-09-08 · District Policy 3750 - Artificial Intelligence (AI) Use
Washington County (UT) School District's board policy frames AI as a teacher assistant requiring human oversight, generally prohibits using confidential or FERPA-protected student data with AI tools, and bars students from using AI to plagiarize, generate deepfakes, or bypass security filters.
-
In effect
Board directive to develop comprehensive AI use guidelines (
Miami-Dade County Public Schools, FL · Effective 2025-08-12 · Board directive to develop comprehensive AI use guidelines (tiered framework)
The Miami-Dade County Public Schools board approved a measure directing staff to create comprehensive ethical AI guidelines for students and teachers, including a tiered use framework and misuse-consequences, with recommendations due back to the board.
-
In effect
Board Policy 2130 (Emerging Technologies) and HCPS Artificia
Hillsborough County Public Schools, FL · Effective 2025-06-02 · Board Policy 2130 (Emerging Technologies) and HCPS Artificial Intelligence Implementation Guide
Hillsborough County Public Schools adopted Board Policy 2130 and an AI Implementation Guide setting age-based generative-AI limits (no unsupervised use before 8th grade; written parental consent and teacher approval thereafter) built on six guiding principles.
-
In effect
BCPS AI Task Force resources and districtwide AI (Microsoft
Broward County Public Schools, FL · Effective 2024-11-01 · BCPS AI Task Force resources and districtwide AI (Microsoft Copilot) rollout guidance
Broward County Public Schools stood up an AI Task Force in November 2024 that produced responsible-use resources for administrators, teachers, and students alongside a large districtwide Microsoft Copilot rollout addressing academic integrity and AI literacy.
-
In effect
Central Bucks School District GoGuardian Beacon Student Moni
Central Bucks School District, PA · Effective 2023-03-01 · Central Bucks School District GoGuardian Beacon Student Monitoring Trial
Central Bucks SD (PA) authorized a district-wide trial of GoGuardian Beacon to conduct 24/7 AI monitoring of middle- and high-school students' online activity on district devices, with a potential $114,000+ subscription pending trial-data review.
-
In effect
Ordinance prohibiting King County government and Sheriff use
King County, WA · Effective 2021-06-01 · Ordinance prohibiting King County government and Sheriff use of facial recognition technology
King County became the first U.S. county to ban its administrative agencies and the Sheriff's Office from using facial recognition technology, with a narrow exception for the National Child Search Assistance Act.
-
In effect
PA Allegheny AFST
Allegheny County, PA · Effective 2016-08-01 · Allegheny County DHS AFST Methodology (May 2019 update)
Allegheny County deploys a predictive risk model — the Allegheny Family Screening Tool — to score child-welfare hotline calls. Decisions to screen-in cases for investigation incorporate AFST scores. The DOJ has investigated the tool for ADA discrimination concerns; the county continues to operate it with documented protocols.
-
Proposed / pending
Policy Code 1910 Generative Artificial Intelligence (draft)
Wake County Public School System, NC · Policy Code 1910 Generative Artificial Intelligence (draft)
Wake County Public School System advanced draft Policy 1910 on generative AI on June 17, 2026, which discourages AI detectors, requires students to disclose and explain AI use and cite it, and bars sharing student PII with certain AI systems, pending board approval.
-
Proposed / pending
Fort Bend ISD GoGuardian Web Content Filter and Student Moni
Fort Bend Independent School District, TX · Fort Bend ISD GoGuardian Web Content Filter and Student Monitoring Procurement
Fort Bend ISD's board approved a procurement of GoGuardian web content filtering and monitoring modules not to exceed $1.6 million over five years, part of a wave of Houston-area districts (including Humble ISD and Cypress-Fairbanks ISD) deploying AI-driven student-device monitoring.
City / local children's online safety rules (68)
-
In effect
NY School FR Moratorium (Rochester effects)
Rochester, NY · Effective 2020-12-22 · Part BB of ch. 56 of Laws of 2020; N.Y. Educ. Law 2-d-1
New York State law triggered by Lockport City SD's facial recognition deployment bars schools statewide — including Rochester-area districts — from acquiring or using biometric identifying technology without state authorization.
-
In effect
Blanchester OH schools AI policy EDEC (Jun. 29, 2026)
Blanchester, OH · Effective 2026-06-29 · Blanchester Local Schools (OH) Board of Education, policy EDEC adoption, June 29, 2026, under Ohio HB 96 mandate
The Blanchester Local Schools board in Clinton County, Ohio adopted a district artificial intelligence policy (policy EDEC) on June 29, 2026, meeting the July 1, 2026 deadline set by Ohio House Bill 96. HB 96 made Ohio the first state in the nation to require every school district to adopt an AI policy — the statewide mandate is the context that makes this small-district adoption notable. The policy governs AI use in the district under the state-mandated framework.
-
In effect
Portland Public Schools genAI pause (Jun. 23, 2026)
Portland, OR · Effective 2026-06-23 · Portland Public Schools (OR) Board of Education unanimous resolution via budget amendment, June 23, 2026, pausing generative AI expansion
The Portland Public Schools board in Oregon voted unanimously on June 23, 2026 to pause the expansion of generative AI in the district. Adopted as a budget amendment championed by board member La Forte, the resolution requires district staff to report back within 120 days on the district's inventory of generative AI tools, its contracts, and how vendors handle student data — and requires advance board authorization before the district signs any generative AI contract. The pause puts elected-board oversight between AI vendors and Oregon's largest school district while the data practices are examined.
-
In effect
Hillsborough County FL Public Schools Board Policy 2130
Tampa, FL · Effective 2026-06-02 · Hillsborough County FL Public Schools Board Policy 2130 — Emerging Technologies + AI Implementation Guide (2026-06-02)
Adopted Board Policy 2130 with an AI Implementation Guide; authorizes vetted AI primarily for teacher use, withholds student access to the enterprise platform initially, and is extending to AI smart-glasses restrictions in classrooms.
-
In effect
Generative and Agentic AI in SFUSD (staff guidance)
San Francisco Unified School District, CA · Effective 2026-01-20 · Generative and Agentic AI in SFUSD (staff guidance)
San Francisco Unified published generative and agentic AI guidance for staff covering recommended uses, hallucination and privacy risks, and unreliability of AI plagiarism checkers, noting it is guidance rather than board-approved policy.
-
In effect
Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools
Charlotte, NC · Effective 2025-10-28 · Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools — Board Policy on Artificial Intelligence (2025-10-28)
Eight-part board policy requiring cross-functional AI committee approval before any system using staff/student data is deployed. Mandates training, age-appropriate tools, public-records and regulatory compliance; AI cannot replace human decision-making.
-
In effect
Township High School District 211
Palatine, IL · Effective 2025-10-13 · Township High School District 211 — AI Use Guidelines (2025-10-13)
D211 guidelines authorize district-vetted enterprise AI tools, bar student entry of PII into non-approved AI, require teacher disclosure of AI use, and prohibit AI as sole basis for grading or discipline.
-
In effect
Greenwich CT Public Schools
Greenwich, CT · Effective 2025-09-25 · Greenwich CT Public Schools — Generative AI Use Guidelines (2025-09-25)
District-adopted guidelines: enterprise Microsoft Copilot and Google Gemini for Education for staff and grades 9-12; bar on consumer AI with student data; AI disclosure expectation; ban on AI as sole basis for grading or discipline.
-
In effect
Durham NC Public Schools
Durham, NC · Effective 2025-09-25 · Durham NC Public Schools — Generative AI Acceptable Use Guidelines (2025-09-25)
DPS Board-reviewed guidelines authorize district-vetted enterprise AI tools, require teacher disclosure of AI use in instruction, bar non-consensual deepfakes, prohibit AI-only grading or discipline, and require parental consent for student AI accounts under 13. Anchored in Policy 3225/4312/7320 (Technology Responsible Use).
-
In effect
Iowa City Community School District
Iowa City, IA · Effective 2025-09-25 · Iowa City Community School District — Generative AI Use Guidelines and Board Policy 605.8R1 (effective September 2025)
Iowa City Community School District (ICCSD) guidelines authorize Microsoft Copilot enterprise on district devices; bar student entry of PII into non-approved AI; require teacher disclosure of AI use; and prohibit AI as sole basis for grading or discipline. The district also adopted Board Policy 605.8R1 governing student use of technology including AI.
-
In effect
Prince William County VA Public Schools
Manassas, VA · Effective 2025-09-17 · Prince William County VA Public Schools — Generative AI Use Procedures (2025-09-17)
District-wide procedures authorize Microsoft Copilot for staff and grades 9-12; ban use of consumer AI with student data; AI disclosure expected on graded work; AI cannot make special-education or discipline decisions without human review.
-
In effect
Prince George's County MD Public Schools
Upper Marlboro, MD · Effective 2025-09-15 · Prince George's County MD Public Schools — Generative AI Use Procedure (2025-09-15)
Procedure approved alongside Board Policy 0123: limits enterprise AI access to approved systems only, bars input of student PII or confidential employee records into AI tools, requires professional accountability for AI-generated content, and may result in disciplinary action for policy violations. The procedure is AP 0123, not AP 0500.
-
In effect
Newton MA Public Schools
Newton, MA · Effective 2025-09-15 · Newton MA Public Schools — Generative AI Use Guidance (2025-09-15)
Newton Public Schools guidance covers vetted enterprise AI tools, classroom disclosure norms, prohibition on AI-generated discipline or special-education decisions, and AI literacy thread in grades 6-12.
-
In effect
Oakland Unified School District
Oakland, CA · Effective 2025-09-10 · Oakland Unified School District — AI Acceptable Use Guidelines (2025-09-10)
Board-approved guidelines: enterprise tool list, ban on AI tools that train on student inputs, AI disclosure on assignments, AI cannot be sole basis for academic placement or discipline.
-
In effect
Cleveland Metropolitan School District
Cleveland, OH · Effective 2025-09-09 · Cleveland Metropolitan School District — AI Acceptable Use Policy (2025-09-09)
Board-adopted AUP: vetted tool list, ban on uploading student records to generative models, AI literacy added to high-school graduation pathway, AI tool vendors must pass district privacy review.
-
In effect
Baltimore City Public Schools
Baltimore, MD · Effective 2025-09-09 · Baltimore City Public Schools — Generative AI Use Guidance (2025-09-09)
City Schools districtwide guidance authorizes vetted enterprise AI tools, bars student entry of PII into non-approved AI, requires teacher disclosure of AI use in instruction, and prohibits AI as sole basis for grading or discipline. Anchored in Board Policy IIBE (Acceptable Use).
-
In effect
Fresno USD AI Guidance
Fresno, CA · Effective 2025-09-09 · Fresno USD AI Guidance (2025-09-09)
Fresno Unified School District publishes official AI guidance on the district's IT/AI department page: district-vetted GenAI tools authorized, PII entry into non-approved AI barred, teacher disclosure when AI is used in instruction required, AI prohibited as the sole basis for grading or discipline.
-
In effect
AUHSD AI Guidance
Anaheim, CA · Effective 2025-09-03 · AUHSD AI Guidance (2025-09-03)
Anaheim Union High School District board adopted an AI policy on September 3, 2025: authorizes Microsoft Copilot enterprise and Khanmigo in closed-loop configurations, bars PII entry into non-approved AI, requires teacher disclosure of AI use, and prohibits AI-generated impersonation of students or staff.
-
In effect
NYC Public Schools Guidance on AI
New York, NY · Effective 2025-09-01 · NYC Public Schools Guidance on AI (2025-09-01)
NYC DOE districtwide guidance lists never-allowed uses, then conditional uses with safeguards. Staff barred from entering PII or sensitive info into GenAI tools not approved through ERMA review.
-
In effect
Fairfax County VA Public Schools
Fairfax, VA · Effective 2025-09-01 · Fairfax County VA Public Schools — FCPS Forward: AI & The Future of Learning (Interim) (2025-09-01)
Interim guidance while a board-adopted policy is drafted (Oct 2025). Approved tools include Adobe Express, Google Storybook/LM, ChatGPT for Teachers pilot configured not to train OpenAI models; students cannot be compelled to interact with AI.
-
In effect
School District of Philadelphia
Philadelphia, PA · Effective 2025-09-01 · School District of Philadelphia — Generative AI Guidelines (PASS program) (2025-09-01)
Approves Google Gemini and Adobe Express with Firefly in a 'walled garden' configuration so user data is not used to train external LLMs. Paired with a three-tier UPenn-developed PD program (PASS).
-
In effect
Boston Public Schools
Boston, MA · Effective 2025-09-01 · Boston Public Schools — Guidance on AI + Draft Districtwide Policy 2026 (2025-09-01)
Revised 2025 guidance plus a May 2026 draft policy that bans non-sanctioned AI use, non-consensual deepfakes, AI as sole basis for grading/discipline, and PII entry into unapproved tools. Moving toward AI literacy graduation requirement.
-
In effect
Volusia County FL Schools
DeLand, FL · Effective 2025-08-26 · Volusia County FL Schools — AI in the Classroom Guidelines (2025-08-26)
School Board Policy 428 and amendments to the Student Code of Conduct (Policy 208E/208S) govern AI use by Volusia County Schools staff and students. Students may use AI as a support tool for brainstorming, clarifying complex texts, or grammar assistance, but must cite AI assistance and may not submit AI-generated work as their own. Teachers may prohibit AI on specific assignments. The policy safeguards student data privacy and fosters equitable access; violations are handled under the district's existing disciplinary code.
-
In effect
Loudoun County VA Public Schools
Ashburn, VA · Effective 2025-08-26 · Loudoun County VA Public Schools — AI Use Guidelines (2025-08-26)
Largest NoVA-suburban district adopted guidelines: vetted enterprise AI tools, parental opt-in for student AI account creation grades 6-8, AI cannot be sole basis for placement or discipline, AI literacy integrated into K-12 ITRT curriculum.
-
In effect
Naperville Community Unit School District 203
Naperville, IL · Effective 2025-08-25 · Naperville Community Unit School District 203 — AI Use Guidance (2025-08-25)
Affluent Chicago suburban district adopted AI guidance: enterprise tools authorized, ban on student AI account creation under 13, AI disclosure expected on graded work, AI cannot be sole basis for placement or discipline.
-
In effect
Public Schools of Brookline
Brookline, MA · Effective 2025-08-19 · Public Schools of Brookline — AI Acceptable Use & Data Privacy Procedure (2025-08-19)
Town of Brookline municipal policy governing use of generative AI tools by all Town Technology Resources users. Distinguishes constrained (contractually approved, confidentiality guaranteed) from unconstrained (consumer, no guarantees) tools. Prohibits inputting PII or protected health information into any generative AI tool. Requires IT Cybersecurity Team approval before use of any generative AI tool. Adopted by the Select Board and also approved by the School Committee.
-
In effect
Mesa Public Schools AZ
Mesa, AZ · Effective 2025-08-19 · Mesa Public Schools AZ — Generative AI Use Guidelines (2025-08-19)
Mesa Public Schools (Arizona's largest district) adopted districtwide GenAI guidelines: authorizes Microsoft Copilot enterprise and Khanmigo for grades 9-12; requires teacher disclosure of AI use; bars student entry of PII into non-approved AI; and ties violations to Governing Board Policy IJNDB (Acceptable Use).
-
In effect
Houston ISD Generative AI Guidebook & Permission/Consent Form (SY 25-26)
Houston, TX · Effective 2025-08-01 · Houston ISD Generative AI Guidebook & Permission/Consent Form (SY 25-26) (2025-08-01)
Age-based GenAI access (Copilot for 14+), required parental consent forms, vetted product list, summer educator PD; allows teacher use for instructional and admin tasks.
-
In effect
Cherokee County GA School District
Canton, GA · Effective 2025-07-24 · Cherokee County GA School District — AI Use Procedure (2025-07-24)
Procedure approved with Board Policy IFBG update: enterprise AI authorized for staff and grades 9-12, no AI use for early-grade summative assessment, AI tools must be FERPA/COPPA compliant, AI use must be cited in graded work.
-
In effect
Dallas ISD AI Handbook (Policies DEC/EIA/FD/FNCA amended)
Dallas, TX · Effective 2025-06-24 · Dallas ISD AI Handbook (Policies DEC/EIA/FD/FNCA amended) (2025-06-24)
Board-adopted handbook for grades 9-12 requiring original student work, restricting access to 13+, requiring annual parental consent, addressing AI-enabled cyberbullying, and embedding AI equity as a 'new digital divide' priority.
-
In effect
Lee's Summit MO
Lees Summit, MO · Effective 2025-06-17 · Lee's Summit MO — Generative AI Use Resolution (2025-06-17)
Council resolution establishes citywide AI use principles: human review, bar on PII entry into consumer AI, IT/legal vetting before procurement, and disclosure of AI assistance in resident-facing communications.
-
In effect
Culver City CA
Culver City, CA · Effective 2025-04-28 · Culver City CA — Generative AI Use Policy for City Staff (2025-04-28)
Council-adopted staff policy: enterprise Microsoft Copilot only; bar on entry of confidential/PII data into consumer AI; disclosure of AI assistance in public communications; review by IT/HR before deploying AI in personnel decisions.
-
In effect
Denver Public Schools AI Handbook
Denver, CO · Effective 2025-04-01 · Denver Public Schools AI Handbook (2025-04-01)
Effective April 2025, DPS authorized MagicSchool, Gemini, and NotebookLM on district devices with output monitoring and data safeguards; 1,200 teachers trained; launching a student AI advisory council.
-
In effect
Howard County MD Public School System
Ellicott City, MD · Effective 2025-03-03 · Howard County MD Public School System — AI Use Policy Statement & Policy 8080 Update (2025-03-03)
Board approved (January 30, 2025, effective March 3, 2025) modifications to Policy 8080 — Responsible Use of Technology, Digital Tools, and Social Media — restricting student personal device (cell phone) use during the school day for all PreK-12 students, with limited exceptions for documented IEP/504/health needs. The policy does not contain an explicit AI section; AI use is addressed only implicitly through broad digital-tools and academic-integrity language.
-
In effect
Olathe KS
Olathe, KS · Effective 2025-02-18 · Olathe KS — Generative AI Acceptable Use Policy (Council Adoption) (2025-02-18)
Council-adopted citywide AI acceptable use policy: bar on entry of confidential/PII data into consumer AI, required disclosure of AI assistance in public communications, IT review for any new AI procurement, and prohibition on AI as sole basis for personnel decisions.
-
In effect
Seattle Public Schools AI Handbook + Superintendent Procedure 2022SP
Seattle, WA · Effective 2025-02-01 · Seattle Public Schools AI Handbook + Superintendent Procedure 2022SP (2025-02-01)
Handbook operates alongside SP 2022SP (Electronic Resources). Requires approved tools to comply with privacy law, treats unauthorized AI use or uncited use as a disciplinary policy breach, and directs schools to teach AI citation.
-
In effect
San Diego Unified School District
San Diego, CA · Effective 2024-12-10 · San Diego Unified School District — Generative AI Use Guidelines (2024-12-10)
District guidelines: enterprise AI authorized for staff and grades 9-12, bar on consumer AI for student-data tasks, AI disclosure expectations, AI literacy integrated into K-12 educational technology standards.
-
In effect
Overland Park KS
Overland Park, KS · Effective 2024-12-02 · Overland Park KS — AI Acceptable Use Policy (2024-12-02)
Council adoption of citywide AI use policy with vetted-tool list, ban on PII entry into public AI, disclosure for AI-assisted public communications, and mandatory training before staff AI use.
-
In effect
Frederick MD
Frederick, MD · Effective 2024-11-21 · Frederick MD — City Generative AI Use Policy (2024-11-21)
Mayor & Board of Aldermen adoption: citywide AI policy with vetted-tool list, bar on PII entry into consumer AI, disclosure expectations for AI-assisted public communications, and IT review of AI procurement.
-
In effect
Broward County FL Powered by AI
Fort Lauderdale, FL · Effective 2024-11-15 · Broward County FL Powered by AI — Responsible Use Framework (2024-11-15)
Task force framework mandating human oversight, supporting the largest K-12 Microsoft Copilot deployment, requiring a school AI liaison at each campus, and pairing with student literacy and educator training.
-
In effect
San Francisco Unified School District
San Francisco, CA · Effective 2024-11-12 · San Francisco Unified School District — Generative AI Use Guidelines (2024-11-12)
District guidelines authorize Microsoft Copilot enterprise for staff; bar student AI accounts under 13; require teacher disclosure when AI is used for instructional design; bar AI use to make discipline or placement decisions without human review.
-
In effect
Houston ISD Generative AI Guidebook
Houston Independent School District, TX · Effective 2024-11-01 · Houston ISD Generative AI Guidebook
Houston ISD released a comprehensive generative-AI guidebook with age-based access rules (supervised pre-approved tools under 14; 14+ with parental consent and teacher permission) plus data-privacy and academic-integrity guidance for students and staff.
-
In effect
Arlington VA Public Schools
Arlington, VA · Effective 2024-10-24 · Arlington VA Public Schools — Guidance on AI Use in APS (2024-10-24)
Districtwide guidance authorizes vetted enterprise tools (Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini for Education), bars student PII entry into consumer AI, requires teacher disclosure to families when AI is used in instructional design, and prohibits AI as sole basis for grading or discipline.
-
In effect
Princeton NJ Public Schools
Princeton, NJ · Effective 2024-10-22 · Princeton NJ Public Schools — AI Use Guidelines (2024-10-22)
District guidelines: vetted enterprise AI list, prohibition on student AI chatbot use grades K-5, AI disclosure expectation on graded work, ban on AI as sole basis for academic placement decisions.
-
In effect
Santa Clara County CA Office of Education
San Jose, CA · Effective 2024-10-10 · Santa Clara County CA Office of Education — AI Guidance for Member Districts (2024-10-10)
County-office guidance to 31 member districts: AI tool vetting framework, model staff/student use policies, data-privacy addendum template for AI vendors, and shared educator PD on responsible AI use.
-
In effect
Saint Paul Public Schools
Saint Paul, MN · Effective 2024-10-08 · 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.
-
In effect
Olympia WA
Olympia, WA · Effective 2024-09-24 · Olympia WA — Artificial Intelligence Use Policy (2024-09-24)
Council-approved AI use policy: enterprise Microsoft Copilot for staff; bar on consumer AI with city data; disclosure on public-facing AI-assisted materials; IT vetting for new AI tools.
-
In effect
Glendale CA
Glendale, CA · Effective 2024-09-17 · Glendale CA — Generative AI Use Policy (City Manager Directive) (2024-09-17)
City Manager directive adopted via Council action: requires departments to use only city-approved AI tools, disclose AI assistance in public communications, and route AI procurement through IT review. Surfaced through Glendale's PrimeGov agenda packet.
-
In effect
Forsyth County GA Schools
Cumming, GA · Effective 2024-09-12 · Forsyth County GA Schools — Generative AI Use Guidelines (Forsyth.AI initiative) (2024-09-12)
District 'Forsyth.AI' initiative pairs adopted use guidelines with a custom secure AI portal for staff and grades 6-12; bars PII entry into external models, requires teacher verification of AI output, and prohibits AI use to make student-discipline or special-education decisions.
-
In effect
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
Montgomery County MD Public Schools
Rockville, MD · Effective 2024-08-29 · Montgomery County MD Public Schools — Guidelines for Use of Artificial Intelligence (2024-08-29)
MCPS issued districtwide AI guidelines authorizing teacher use of vetted tools (Google Gemini for Education, Microsoft Copilot), barring student entry of personal data into GenAI, requiring teacher disclosure when AI generates student feedback, and prohibiting AI-only disciplinary or grading decisions. Implemented via Board Policy IGS (Educational Technology) administered through BoardDocs.
-
In effect
Policy 5110 - CCSD Policy on Generative Artificial Intellige
Chappaqua Central School District, NY · Effective 2024-08-29 · Policy 5110 - CCSD Policy on Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Integration
Chappaqua CSD's board-adopted GenAI policy prohibits district users from inputting FERPA-protected student data or Education Law 2-d protected information into AI systems, requires use of only Ed Law 2-d compliant approved tools with students, and mandates transparency about how AI is used.
-
In effect
Jefferson County CO Public Schools (Jeffco)
Golden, CO · Effective 2024-08-22 · Jefferson County CO Public Schools (Jeffco) — Guidelines for the Use of Generative AI (2024-08-22)
Districtwide guidelines: enterprise tools (Google Gemini for Education, Microsoft Copilot) authorized; bar on staff entering student data into consumer AI products; AI disclosure expectations for instructional materials; required AI literacy PD for staff.
-
In effect
Miami-Dade County Public Schools
Miami, FL · Effective 2024-08-15 · Miami-Dade County Public Schools — Generative AI Use and District Guidance (2024-08-15)
M-DCPS, the nation's third-largest district, adopted districtwide GenAI guidance directing approved tools (Google Gemini for Education, Microsoft Copilot enterprise), barring entry of student PII into non-approved models, and requiring teacher review of any AI-generated student-facing materials. Paired with M-DCPS Board Policy 7540.03 (Student Use of Technology) administered through BoardDocs.
-
In effect
Clark County NV STELLAR AI Framework
Las Vegas, NV · Effective 2024-08-15 · Clark County NV STELLAR AI Framework — District Implementation (2024-08-15)
Implements Nevada's STELLAR framework with a district safe list and closed-loop systems that prevent student data from training external models; ties to school-level academic integrity policies.
-
In effect
Chicago Public Schools AI Guidebook
Chicago, IL · Effective 2024-08-01 · Chicago Public Schools AI Guidebook — Guidance for Generative AI Use (2024-08-01)
Quarterly-updated CPS guidance permits district-approved tools with teacher permission; bars PII/PHI/confidential data entry. Warns against AI-detection software due to false-positive risk for English learners.
-
In effect
CPS AI Guidebook (generative AI guidance for students, staff
Chicago Public Schools, IL · Effective 2024-08-01 · CPS AI Guidebook (generative AI guidance for students, staff, families, administrators)
Chicago Public Schools published an AI Guidebook giving human-in-the-loop generative-AI guidance for students, staff, families, and administrators, requiring teacher permission and AI-use citation by students and barring confidential data in AI tools.
-
In effect
Vancouver Public Schools Gaggle Safety Management Student Mo
Vancouver Public Schools, WA · Effective 2024-08-01 · Vancouver Public Schools Gaggle Safety Management Student Monitoring Contract
Vancouver Public Schools (WA) signed a $328,036 three-year Gaggle Safety Management contract to run AI monitoring of 24,000+ students' typing on district devices at school and at home to flag violence, self-harm, and safety concerns.
-
In effect
Gwinnett County GA Public Schools
Lawrenceville, GA · Effective 2024-07-15 · Gwinnett County GA Public Schools — Guidance for Human-Centered AI Use (2024-07-15)
Requires critical review of AI-generated content and humans in the loop; prohibits privacy-compromising uses. Paired with the GCPS AI-Ready Framework developed with Google, Microsoft, and higher-ed partners.
-
In effect
Long Beach CA
Long Beach, CA · Effective 2024-07-09 · Long Beach CA — Generative AI Guidance (Administrative Guidance, not a formal Council Acceptable Use Policy) (2024-07-09)
The City of Long Beach published a Generative AI Interim Guidance (now at version 1.3) as an administrative tool to help staff use generative AI safely and responsibly — covering risks around AI bias, data privacy, and cybersecurity. The guidance explicitly states it is not a policy or ordinance. The Legistar council-file URL in the original entry could not be confirmed via official search results.
-
In effect
LAUSD BUL-151113.0
Los Angeles, CA · Effective 2024-04-08 · LAUSD BUL-151113.0 — Guidelines for Authorized Use of AI (2024-04-08)
LAUSD authorized-use guidelines for employees, students, and associated persons. Works with BUL-999.15; requires district-approved tools, bars confidential/PII entry into non-approved GenAI, and mandates educator review of AI outputs.
-
In effect
Peninsula School District AI Guidance (Principles and Belief
Peninsula School District, WA · Effective 2023-07-15 · Peninsula School District AI Guidance (Principles and Beliefs for AI Use)
One of the first US districts to publish AI guidance, Peninsula SD (WA) sets principles requiring staff to be diligent custodians of student data, cautions against unreliable AI detection tools, and mandates transparency and human oversight in all AI use.
-
In effect
Cheyenne Mountain SD 12 Verkada AI Facial-Recognition Camera
Cheyenne Mountain School District 12, CO · Effective 2022-08-01 · Cheyenne Mountain SD 12 Verkada AI Facial-Recognition Camera Surveillance System
Cheyenne Mountain SD 12 (Colorado Springs) deployed nearly 400 Verkada AI-enabled cameras with facial recognition to identify 'persons of interest,' installed before Colorado's 2022 statewide facial-recognition moratorium and allowed to continue under the grandfather provision.
-
In effect
Ordinance on Surveillance Oversight and Information Sharing
Boston, MA · Effective 2021-10-21 · Ordinance on Surveillance Oversight and Information Sharing
Boston bars police from acquiring, deploying, or newly repurposing surveillance technology without City Council approval and restricts sharing student information with police, complementing its earlier facial-recognition ban.
-
In effect
New York Biometric Surveillance in Schools Moratorium (halti
Lockport City School District, NY · Effective 2020-12-22 · New York Biometric Surveillance in Schools Moratorium (halting Lockport CSD facial recognition system)
A first-in-the-nation state moratorium signed December 2020 halted the $2.7 million facial-recognition surveillance system that the Lockport City School District had activated in January 2020, pending a state privacy and demographic-accuracy review.
-
In effect
Wake County NC Public School System
Raleigh, NC · Wake County NC Public School System — Generative AI Guidelines & Policy 6446 Revision (undefined)
Board-revised Policy 6446 (Internet/Online Services) plus standalone AI guidelines: district-approved AI tools list, K-5 prohibition on student-facing AI chatbots, required parental consent for student AI accounts grades 6-8, AI literacy requirement for grades 9-12.
-
Proposed / pending
Guidance on Artificial Intelligence (preliminary 'traffic li
New York City Public Schools, NY · Guidance on Artificial Intelligence (preliminary 'traffic light' framework)
NYC Public Schools issued preliminary AI guidance using a green/yellow/red 'traffic light' framework that permits some staff and student uses, requires human review for others, and prohibits AI in grading, discipline, IEPs and placement decisions, with a fuller playbook to follow.
-
Proposed / pending
Orange County FL Public Schools
Orlando, FL · Orange County FL Public Schools — Draft AI Policy (2026-05-13)
Draft policy for SY 26-27 restricts use to ChatGPT, Gemini, Copilot, Adobe Firefly, Khanmigo in closed configurations; bars deepfakes, requires original wording, verification, and human-in-the-loop.