Introduction
The legislative landscape in the United States is witnessing a surge in initiatives aimed at regulating artificial intelligence (AI). Both California and Michigan are at the forefront of this movement, introducing a series of bills that address various aspects of AI governance, including transparency [2] [4], safety [1] [2] [3] [4], and ethical considerations [2]. These efforts reflect a proactive approach to managing the implications of AI technologies and may influence broader discussions on AI regulation at both state and federal levels.
Description
During the state legislative season [3], California lawmakers are currently on summer hiatus [3]. In Washington DC [3], a bipartisan bill has been introduced focusing on copyright protection and AI training data [3].
In California [1] [2] [3] [4], several bills are progressing through the Legislature:
- SB 11 [2], authored by Sen [1]. Angelique Ashby [1], seeks to apply the state’s right of publicity law and criminal false impersonation statutes to AI-generated images and videos [2] [4]. This bill has passed the Senate and is currently in the Assembly [1].
- AB 853, introduced by Assm [1]. Buffy Wicks [1], mandates large online platforms to label AI-generated content and requires manufacturers of devices that capture images or audio to provide users the option to apply digital signatures to authentic material [1]. This bill has passed the Assembly and is now in the Senate Appropriations Committee [1].
- AB 412, the AI Copyright Protection Act [1] [2] [3] [4], introduced by Assm [1]. Rebecca Bauer-Kahan [1], aims to create a framework for copyright owners to ascertain if their works were used to train generative AI models [1] [2]. This bill has been paused for further deliberation and will be revisited in 2026 [3].
- The LEAD for Kids Act (AB 1064), also by Assm [1]. Bauer-Kahan [1], proposes the establishment of an AI standards board to evaluate and regulate AI technologies for children [1] [2] [3], emphasizing transparency and privacy protections [1] [2]. It has passed the Assembly and is currently in the Senate Appropriations Committee [1].
- SB 243, sponsored by Sen [1]. Steve Padilla [1], requires AI platforms to inform minors that chatbots are not human [1] [2] [3] [4]. This bill has passed both the Senate and Assembly committees and is awaiting further review [1].
- SB 833, introduced by Sen [1] [3]. Jerry McNerney [1], mandates human oversight for AI systems managing critical infrastructure [1] [2] [3] [4]. It has passed the Senate and is currently in the Assembly [1].
- SB 53, known as the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act and sponsored by Sen [2]. Scott Wiener [1], has been amended to enhance safety and security protocols for large developers of AI foundation models [2]. This bill requires developers to publish detailed safety protocols [2], including testing procedures and risk assessments for catastrophic risks [2], while also providing whistleblower protections for employees reporting critical risks [2]. It has passed the Senate and is in the Assembly Appropriations Committee [1].
- The California AI Transparency Act requires generative AI creators with over 1,000,000 monthly users to provide a free AI detection tool for users to identify AI-generated content.
- The CalCompute bill is a revised version of a previously vetoed act concerning AI models.
In Michigan [1] [2] [3] [4], two significant bills have been introduced:
- HB 4668 [3], the AI Safety and Security Transparency Act [1] [2], introduced by Rep [1] [3]. Sarah Lightner [1], requires large AI developers to establish safety protocols to prevent critical risks [1], conduct annual third-party audits [1], and provide whistleblower protections [2]. This bill is currently with the Judiciary Committee [1].
- HB 4667 proposes new criminal penalties for using AI to commit crimes, establishing severe penalties for developing or using AI systems with criminal intent [1]. This bill is also under consideration in the Judiciary Committee [1].
These state-level initiatives reflect a renewed focus on AI governance [2], particularly following the recent failure of a federal AI regulatory moratorium [2]. Legislators in Michigan have expressed concerns about potential federal restrictions on state-level AI regulations [2], urging the federal government to protect state initiatives [2]. As these legislative efforts advance [2], they may influence broader discussions on AI governance at both state and federal levels [2], potentially leading to a patchwork of regulations or a convergence on harmonized standards [2]. The outcomes of these initiatives will be closely monitored by various stakeholders [2], including industry [2], civil society [2], and other states [2] [4].
Conclusion
The legislative actions in California and Michigan highlight a proactive approach to AI governance [2], emphasizing transparency [1] [2] [4], safety [1] [2] [3] [4], and ethical considerations [2]. These efforts may set precedents for other states and influence federal policy [2], contributing to a more cohesive regulatory environment [2]. The evolving landscape of AI legislation will play a crucial role in shaping the future of AI development and deployment [2], with significant implications for industry practices [2], consumer protection [2], and technological innovation [2].
References
[1] https://www.transparencycoalition.ai/news/ai-legislative-update-july-18-2025
[2] https://nquiringminds.com/ai-legal-news/state-legislatures-advance-ai-governance-bills-focused-on-safety-transparency-and-ethics/
[3] https://www.transparencycoalition.ai/news/ai-legislative-update-july-25-2025
[4] https://nquiringminds.com/ai-legal-news/california-advances-comprehensive-ai-legislation-amid-federal-regulatory-gaps/
