Artificial Intelligence Policy Tracker
Search
Menu

AI policy change log

Dated, source-backed updates: what changed, the practical impact, the status after the change and the official source. Urgent and high-impact items are separated from routine updates.

RSS feed Email digest
Filter changes (1 active)
Reset
2026202520242023202220212020201920182017

Weekly digest

Dated, source-linked AI policy changes and upcoming application dates, once a week. No marketing.

Double opt-in; one-click unsubscribe in every email. Choose jurisdictions

All changes (3)

Download as CSV
New York (United States) High at the time

New York signs the chapter amendment that rewrites the RAISE Act

The chapter amendment to the RAISE Act was signed as chapter 96 of 2026. Its sponsor memo says it repeals the underlying 2025 chapter and establishes a new regulatory regime aligned more closely with California SB 53. Recorded from search extracts of the Senate bill page; the effective date was not confirmed.

Practical impact: Frontier developers should read the RAISE Act as amended, not the 2025 text.

New York RAISE Act (frontier model safety) New York State Senate: bill S8828 Pending review (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)
New York (United States) High at the time Adopted

New York signs the RAISE Act on frontier-model safety

The Governor signed the Responsible AI Safety and Education Act with agreed amendments aligning it to California SB 53, requiring large frontier developers to publish safety protocols and report critical incidents, reportedly effective 1 January 2027.

Practical impact: Frontier-model developers serving New York should align safety documentation with California SB 53 to satisfy both laws; verify the enrolled chapter text.

New York RAISE Act (frontier model safety) S6953-B Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)
New York (United States) High at the time In force

New York City begins enforcing Local Law 144 on automated employment decision tools

The Department of Consumer and Worker Protection started enforcing bias-audit, published-summary and candidate-notice requirements for automated employment decision tools used for hiring or promotion in the city.

Practical impact: Employers using screening tools for NYC roles need an annual independent bias audit and ten business days of notice to candidates.

NYC Local Law 144 (automated employment decision tools) Automated Employment Decision Tools (AEDT) Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)

Disclaimer: informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult a qualified lawyer before acting.

Frequently asked questions

What counts as a change?

A dated development in the life of an instrument: adoption, entry into force, an amendment, a withdrawal, a gazette notice, the opening or closing of a consultation, or guidance being issued under it. Each entry says what changed and what it means in practice, and links the official source.

How far back does the change log go?

To 2017, which is where the earliest recorded national AI strategies sit. Entries are grouped by year, and the whole log is available as an RSS feed and through the API.

Will I be told when something changes?

Follow a jurisdiction or an instrument and you will be alerted when a change is recorded against it. There is also a digest you can subscribe to. Both are free.