Search and filter source-backed AI laws, regulations, standards, guidance and consultations. Each record shows its status, key dates, verification state and 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
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
A risk-triage self-assessment across the AI lifecycle that replaced the NSW AI Assurance Framework. High- or critical-risk systems go to the AI Review Committee; using the assessment platform is mandatory for agencies under Circular DCS-2026-02.
Applies from 30 Sep 2026Pending 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
Tokyo Metropolitan Government AI Introduction and Utilization Guideline
東京都 AI導入・活用ガイドライン
Practical rules for Tokyo Metropolitan Government divisions adopting AI, including generative AI: a basic policy, six AI-specific cautions and a process from planning through procurement to retirement, with points graded as required or recommended. A staff handbook on generative AI was issued the same day.
Adopted 30 Mar 2026Pending review (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Overheidsbrede visie generatieve AI (Government-wide vision on generative AI)
Adopted in January 2024, the vision sets the government's position on generative AI: a human-centric, safe and fair approach, provisional restrictions on using non-contracted generative AI tools with government data, investment in Dutch and European open models (GPT-NL), and actions on skills, procurement and supervision. It complements the AI Act and the government's AI strategy.
Adopted 18 Jan 2024Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
ISO/IEC 42001:2023 Information technology – Artificial intelligence – Management system
The first certifiable management-system standard for AI. It specifies requirements for establishing, implementing, maintaining and improving an AI management system within an organisation: context and leadership, AI policy, risk and impact assessment, objectives, resources and competence, operational controls across the AI lifecycle, performance evaluation and improvement, with Annex A controls on data, transparency, human oversight, third parties and responsible use. Certification is voluntary but increasingly requested in procurement; regulators reference it as evidence of governance.
Adopted 18 Dec 2023Verified (reviewed by Bhaskar Bhatt; a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
Tamil Nadu Safe and Ethical Artificial Intelligence Policy 2020
Recommends a six-dimension framework (TAM-DEF: transparency and audit, accountability and legal issues, misuse protection, digital divide and data deficit, ethics and fairness, equity) and a DEEP-MAX scorecard for deploying AI in government, with AI procurement guidelines.
Adopted 18 Sep 2020Pending review (a factual check against the official source, not a legal review)Official source
UAE National Strategy for Artificial Intelligence 2031
The UAE National Strategy for AI 2031 aims to position the UAE as a global leader in AI by 2031. It sets objectives across priority sectors, AI talent and research, data and infrastructure, government adoption and governance, including a commitment to AI ethics and to developing appropriate regulation. It is a strategy document that guides government programmes and does not itself impose obligations on private organisations.
Adopted 16 Oct 2017Verified (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.
