AI safety policy
Illinois's SB 315 mandates the first annual third-party AI safety audits in the U.S., effective 2028. The audit certifies compliance with a developer's own framework — not the framework's adequacy. Here's what that distinction means for compliance and legal teams.
State AI Laws
Connecticut, Arkansas, and Utah AI obligations take effect July 1 — while DOJ litigation challenging similar state laws is already underway in Colorado. Standard compliance guidance doesn't address what to do when both are true simultaneously.
AI Compliance
Colorado SB26-189 replaces the state’s original high-risk AI framework with ADMT rules focused on consequential decisions, documentation, notice, records, and review.
State AI Laws
Connecticut SB 5 is now law. Here’s how AI governance teams should map employment AI, AI companions, provenance, frontier-model controls, and preemption-sensitive obligations.
State AI Laws
Colorado’s SB26-189 may narrow one AI explanation requirement, but developers and deployers still face documentation, records, notice, and review obligations.
State AI Laws
State AI laws are shifting before enforcement patterns mature. Colorado, California, Utah, and New York show why AI governance teams need to track live obligations, delayed triggers, proposed amendments, and guidance gaps.
AI Regulation
The White House’s latest AI Executive Order doesn’t preempt state laws on paper — it sidelines them in practice by pairing DOJ litigation with federal funding leverage, quietly centralizing AI governance at the federal level.