Search and filter source-backed AI laws, regulations, standards, guidance and consultations. Each record shows its status, key dates, verification state and official source.
DIFC Data Protection Regulations, Regulation 10: personal data processed through autonomous and semi-autonomous systems
Sets rules for personal data processed through autonomous and semi-autonomous systems in the Dubai International Financial Centre: notice and transparency when such a system is used, the deployer as controller and the operator as processor, limits on purposes, a future certification scheme, and an Autonomous Systems Officer for high-risk processing.
Adopted 1 Sep 2023Pending review (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Disposición 2/2023 – Recomendaciones para una Inteligencia Artificial Fiable (Disposition 2/2023 – Recommendations for Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence)
Disposición 2/2023 approves a set of recommendations for trustworthy AI addressed to projects designed, developed or adopted by the national public sector, together with a diagram of the stages of an AI project. Aligned with the UNESCO Recommendation on the Ethics of AI, it emphasises human-centred design, transparency, human oversight, non-discrimination, data protection and accountability across the project lifecycle. It is guidance rather than a binding regulatory regime.
Adopted 2 Jun 2023Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
The draft act implements the EU AI Act in Poland: it creates the Commission for the Development and Safety of Artificial Intelligence as the market-surveillance authority and single point of contact, sets procedures for complaints and inspections, provides for a regulatory sandbox and defines the national penalty regime.
Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Yapay Zekâ Kanunu Teklifi (Artificial Intelligence Law proposal submitted to the Grand National Assembly, June 2024)
A short framework bill proposing principles for AI (safety, transparency, fairness, accountability, privacy), a risk-based approach with registration of high-risk systems, operator obligations and penalties, and supervision by designated authorities, broadly modelled on the EU AI Act.
Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Anteproyecto de Ley para el buen uso y la gobernanza de la inteligencia artificial
The draft implements the EU AI Act in Spain: it allocates supervision among AESIA, the data-protection authority, the electoral board, the financial and audiovisual regulators, sets the national penalty scale (up to EUR 35 million or 7% of turnover for prohibited practices), treats failure to label AI-generated content as a serious infringement and provides for the national sandbox to continue.
Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Proyecto de Ley Orgánica de Regulación y Promoción de la Inteligencia Artificial
The draft organic law proposes principles for AI (human-centric, transparency, non-discrimination, safety), a risk-based classification with prohibited and high-risk uses, obligations for developers and deployers, a national AI authority and sanctions, drawing on the EU AI Act and UNESCO recommendation.
Verified (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
The EU AI Act is a binding regulation that sets rules for developing, placing on the market and using AI systems in the European Union. It bans a small set of practices considered unacceptable, imposes detailed requirements on "high-risk" AI systems used in areas such as employment, education, credit, essential services, law enforcement and safety-critical products, requires transparency for chatbots and synthetic content, and creates separate duties for providers of general-purpose AI models. Obligations apply in phases between 2025 and 2028.
Applies from 2 Aug 2026Pending review (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
Extremadura Decree-law 2/2023 of 8 March on urgent measures to promote artificial intelligence
Decreto-ley 2/2023, de 8 de marzo, de medidas urgentes de impulso a la inteligencia artificial en Extremadura
A framework to support and promote AI in Extremadura under principles of ethical and transparent AI; it required the regional government to adopt an Extremadura AI strategy within nine months.
In force 11 Mar 2023Pending review (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Federal Law No. 123-FZ of 24 April 2020 on an experiment to establish special regulation to create the conditions for the development and implementation of AI technologies in Moscow
Establishes a five-year experimental legal regime in Moscow (from 1 July 2020) allowing participants to develop and deploy AI technologies under special rules, including processing of anonymised personal data for AI purposes, coordinated by the Moscow government with a register of participants. It was accompanied by amendments to the personal-data law.
In force 1 Jul 2020Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Council of Europe Framework Convention on Artificial Intelligence and Human Rights, Democracy and the Rule of Law (CETS No. 225)
The first international treaty on AI. Parties must adopt or maintain measures so that activities within the lifecycle of AI systems are consistent with human rights, democracy and the rule of law, covering public authorities and actors on their behalf and, by choice of approach, private actors. It sets principles (human dignity and autonomy, transparency and oversight, accountability, equality and non-discrimination, privacy, reliability, safe innovation), requires remedies, procedural safeguards and risk and impact assessment, allows moratoria or bans for incompatible uses, and creates a Conference of the Parties for follow-up. National-security activities and defence are excluded.
Adopted 17 May 2024Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Galician Law 2/2025 of 2 April for the development and promotion of artificial intelligence in Galicia
Lei 2/2025, do 2 de abril, para o desenvolvemento e impulso da intelixencia artificial en Galicia
Sets the framework for how the Galician administration and regional public sector design, procure, deploy and use AI. It creates a Galician AI Office, a Galician AI Council and AI commissioners within departments, and provides for a regulatory sandbox and support for start-ups.
In force 24 Apr 2025Pending review (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Goiás Complementary Law No. 205 of 19 May 2025: State Policy for the Promotion of Innovation in Artificial Intelligence
Lei Complementar nº 205, de 19 de maio de 2025 (Política Estadual de Fomento à Inovação em Inteligência Artificial)
Promotes AI innovation, prefers open-source and open models in public AI projects, and gives people rights over automated decisions, including information, contestation and human review on appeal. It creates an AI ethics and innovation advisory body, a permanent state AI sandbox and an annual AI prize.
Adopted 19 May 2025Pending review (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Illinois's frontier-AI safety and transparency law, built on the model of California SB 53: large frontier developers must publish a frontier AI framework and update it every year, publish a transparency report when they deploy a new or substantially modified frontier model, report critical safety incidents to the Illinois Emergency Management Agency and Office of Homeland Security, and protect whistleblowing employees. Unlike the California and New York laws, it also requires annual independent third-party audits, with a published summary.
Adopted 6 Jul 2026Pending review (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Illinois Wellness and Oversight for Psychological Resources Act (HB 1806, Public Act 104-0054)
No one may provide therapy or psychotherapy in Illinois, including through AI, unless it is delivered by a licensed professional. AI may be used only for administrative and supplementary support, with notice to and consent from the client. The Department of Financial and Professional Regulation enforces it.
In force 1 Aug 2025Pending review (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Illinois Artificial Intelligence Video Interview Act (820 ILCS 42)
In force since 1 January 2020, the Act requires employers that use AI to analyse video interviews of applicants for Illinois-based positions to notify applicants, explain how the AI works and what characteristics it evaluates, obtain consent, limit sharing of videos, and delete videos on request within 30 days; a 2022 amendment requires employers relying solely on AI to decide who gets an in-person interview to report demographic data annually.
In force 1 Jan 2020Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Illinois Public Act 103-0804 (HB 3773): Artificial intelligence in employment decisions – amendment to the Illinois Human Rights Act
Signed 9 August 2024 and effective 1 January 2026, the Act makes it a civil-rights violation for an employer to use artificial intelligence in recruitment, hiring, promotion, discipline, discharge or other terms of employment in a way that subjects employees to discrimination on the basis of protected classes, or to use zip codes as a proxy for protected classes. Employers must notify employees when AI is used for such decisions; the Department of Human Rights is to adopt rules on notice.
Applies from 1 Jan 2026Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Digital Personal Data Protection Act, 2023 and DPDP Rules, 2025
The DPDP Act is India's cross-sector personal-data law. It applies to digital personal data processed in India and to processing outside India connected with offering goods or services to people in India. It requires a lawful basis (consent or specified legitimate uses), notice, purpose limitation, data accuracy, security safeguards, breach notification to the Data Protection Board and affected individuals, and grants rights of access, correction, erasure and grievance redress. Significant Data Fiduciaries face extra duties such as impact assessments and audits. The Act does not mention AI specifically, but it governs the personal data used to train and operate AI systems.
Adopted 11 Aug 2023Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
These measures govern generative AI services offered to the public in China, whether producing text, images, audio or video. Providers must use lawfully sourced training data, take steps against discrimination, protect personal information, label generated content, handle user complaints and ensure outputs comply with content rules. Services with public-opinion or social-mobilisation capacity must complete security assessments and algorithm filing. The measures took effect on 15 August 2023.
In force 15 Aug 2023Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Anything a government or standards body has actually issued: acts, regulations, executive orders, rules, national strategies, frameworks, guidance, codes of practice, voluntary standards and open consultations. Each record states which of those it is, whether it binds anyone, and links the official source it was read from.
Are these records legally verified?
A record is marked verified only after a named reviewer has opened its official source and confirmed each field. Anything that has not been through that carries "pending review" on the record itself, and the data-health document reports the current totals. Nothing here is legal advice.
How current is the information?
Every record carries the date its source document was published and the date it was last checked. A record not re-checked within the freshness window set by the verification policy is flagged as stale rather than quietly presented as current.
Can I reuse this data?
Yes. The records are published under CC BY 4.0 with attribution, and are available as CSV, newline-delimited JSON and a read-only REST API that needs no key. Cite the record URL, the date accessed and the official source alongside it.
