Verified against the official source 26 Sep 2026 · reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review or legal advice)What this label means
Verified
— a named reviewer opened the official source and confirmed the record; the date and the reviewer are shown.
Pending review
— linked to the official source and in the queue for a reviewer to confirm.
Source-linked
— linked to the official source, not yet confirmed by a reviewer.
The United States has 5 recorded AI policy instruments, 3 of them binding and 3 in force. Federal: executive-branch policy (Executive Order 14179 of January 2025 and the July 2025 AI Action Plan) plus binding OMB requirements for federal agencies' use and procurement of AI; NIST AI RMF is voluntary. The United States has no comprehensive federal AI statute.
The United States has no comprehensive federal AI statute. Federal policy is set through executive orders, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) memoranda for federal agencies, agency enforcement under existing consumer-protection, civil-rights, employment and financial laws, and voluntary frameworks such as the NIST AI Risk Management Framework. States have moved faster: Colorado enacted the first cross-sector algorithmic-discrimination law in 2024, and California, Texas, Utah and others have adopted AI-specific statutes on transparency, frontier models, chatbots and government use. The result is a patchwork that organisations must map state by state and sector by sector.
What is the current regulatory status?
Federal: executive-branch policy (Executive Order 14179 of January 2025 and the July 2025 AI Action Plan) plus binding OMB requirements for federal agencies' use and procurement of AI; NIST AI RMF is voluntary. States: a growing number of binding statutes with 2025–2026 effective dates. A reviewer must confirm the status of federal efforts to pre-empt or discourage state AI laws announced in late 2025.
Binding rules versus guidance
Binding on the private sector: state statutes (for example Colorado SB 26-189, California SB 53, Texas HB 149), sector laws (FCRA, ECOA, Title VII, HIPAA, FTC Act Section 5) as applied to AI. Binding on federal agencies: OMB memoranda M-25-21 and M-25-22. Voluntary: NIST AI RMF and its Generative AI Profile.
NIST AI Risk Management Framework (AI RMF 1.0) and Generative AI Profile
The NIST AI Risk Management Framework is a voluntary framework for managing risks to individuals, organisations and society from AI. It organises practices into four functions: Govern, Map, Measure and Manage, and describes characteristics of trustworthy AI such as validity, safety, security, accountability, explainability, privacy and fairness. The July 2024 Generative AI Profile (NIST AI 600-1) adds risks and suggested actions specific to generative AI. Many US procurement requirements and state laws reference the framework as a recognised approach.
Adopted 26 Jan 2023Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Executive Order 14179: Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence
Executive Order 14179, signed 23 January 2025, sets US federal policy to sustain and enhance American AI dominance, directs the development of an AI Action Plan within 180 days, and orders agencies to review and revise or rescind actions taken under the revoked Executive Order 14110 that are inconsistent with the new policy. It also called for revision of the OMB memoranda governing federal agency use and procurement of AI, which OMB replaced in April 2025 with M-25-21 and M-25-22.
In force 23 Jan 2025Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Executive Order 14365: Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence
Directs the Attorney General to set up an AI Litigation Task Force to challenge state AI laws, asks the Commerce Department to identify "onerous" state AI laws (with non-deployment broadband (BEAD) funds tied to that list), and asks the FTC for a policy statement on AI outputs. It does not itself pre-empt any state law; that would take legislation or a court ruling.
In force 11 Dec 2025Pending review (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
OMB Memorandum M-25-21: Accelerating Federal Use of AI through Innovation, Governance, and Public Trust
M-25-21 directs US federal agencies on how to govern and use AI. It requires agencies to designate Chief AI Officers, maintain AI governance boards, publish AI use-case inventories, and apply minimum risk-management practices to "high-impact" AI, including pre-deployment testing, AI impact assessments, ongoing monitoring, human oversight and training, and remedies for affected individuals. It replaced the 2024 memoranda with a greater emphasis on adoption and innovation while retaining core risk practices.
In force 3 Apr 2025Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
America's AI Action Plan is the federal AI strategy mandated by Executive Order 14179. It lists more than 90 policy actions grouped under three pillars: accelerating innovation (including removing regulatory barriers), building AI infrastructure such as data centres and chip fabrication with streamlined permitting, and leading internationally through AI exports and security measures. It was released with accompanying executive orders on federal procurement, data-centre permitting and AI exports.
Adopted 23 Jul 2025Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Which states in US have their own AI laws and policies?
25 instruments on record from 12 of US's sub-national jurisdictions. Each applies only within its own territory.
Sub-national AI laws and policies recorded for United States
No future deadlines are recorded for US; past milestones are listed on each policy page. New dates reach the calendar feed: US feed · how it works
Current priorities
Federal deregulatory agenda and infrastructure build-out under the AI Action Plan, agency AI use-case inventories and procurement rules, state implementation of algorithmic-discrimination and frontier-model transparency laws, and litigation and enforcement by state attorneys general and the FTC on deceptive AI claims.
@misc{aipolicytracker2026_airegulationinunitedstat,
author = {{AIPolicyTracker}},
title = {{AI regulation in United States}},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://aipolicytracker.org/jurisdictions/us}},
url = {https://aipolicytracker.org/jurisdictions/us},
urldate = {2026-10-27},
note = {Data licensed CC BY 4.0. Accessed 27 October 2026}
}
Frequently asked questions
Is there a federal AI law in the United States?
No comprehensive federal AI statute exists. Federal policy is set by executive orders, OMB memoranda binding on agencies, and enforcement of existing laws. Binding AI-specific rules for businesses come mainly from state legislation.
Does the United States have an AI law?
Yes. 3 binding instruments are in force: EO 14179; Executive Order 14365 (state AI laws); OMB M-25-21.
Who regulates AI in the United States?
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) (Voluntary frameworks and standards); Office of Management and Budget (OMB) (Federal agency AI use and procurement policy); Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (Consumer protection and unfair or deceptive AI practices).
What is the status of AI regulation in the United States?
Federal: executive-branch policy (Executive Order 14179 of January 2025 and the July 2025 AI Action Plan) plus binding OMB requirements for federal agencies' use and procurement of AI; NIST AI RMF is voluntary. States: a growing number of binding statutes with 2025–2026 effective dates. A reviewer must confirm the status of federal efforts to pre-empt or discourage state AI laws announced in late 2025.
Is there a national AI strategy in the United States?
Yes: Winning the Race: America's AI Action Plan (2025).
What is binding and what is only guidance in the United States?
Binding on the private sector: state statutes (for example Colorado SB 26-189, California SB 53, Texas HB 149), sector laws (FCRA, ECOA, Title VII, HIPAA, FTC Act Section 5) as applied to AI. Binding on federal agencies: OMB memoranda M-25-21 and M-25-22. Voluntary: NIST AI RMF and its Generative AI Profile.
Which states in the United States have AI laws?
12 of the 12 states recorded here have a binding AI instrument adopted or in force: California (California training-data transparency law (AB 2013), California AI Transparency Act (SB 942)); Colorado (Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189)); Connecticut (Connecticut online safety and frontier AI law (SB 5)); Illinois (Illinois AI Safety Measures Act (SB 315), Illinois AI Video Interview Act); Kentucky (Kentucky state-government AI law (SB 4)); Maryland (Maryland AI Governance Act 2024); Montana (Montana Right to Compute Act); New York (New York AI companion safeguards, NYC Local Law 144 (automated employment decision tools)); Tennessee (Tennessee ELVIS Act); Texas (Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA)); Utah (Utah Artificial Intelligence Policy Act (SB 149), Utah mental health chatbot law (HB 452)); Washington State (Washington AI companion chatbot law (ESHB 2225)). Coverage of states is still growing; the coverage page lists what is missing.
Disclaimer: informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult a qualified lawyer before acting.
