US State AI Law Applicability Matrix
In brief
The US State AI Law Applicability Matrix is a free XLSX and DOCX register for Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189). Every US federal and state AI instrument on record in one sheet, with status, legal force, application date, recorded duties and verification state, plus columns to decide which apply to you.
- Format
- XLSX and DOCX · Register
- Version
- v1, built 5 Oct 2026
- Duties cited
- 17 from 3 instruments
- Rows from the records
- 47
- Frameworks
- Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189)
- Written for
- Deployer / user organisation, Provider / developer, General-purpose AI model provider
- Price and licence
- Free · CC BY 4.0
What's inside
- Matrix of every US instrument on record with status and date
- Recorded duties sheet for those instruments
- US deadlines sheet
- Document: overview table and a section for your position
Preview
The sheets and sections of version v1, as built. Columns marked ▾ have a dropdown; ƒ is a formula.
Sheet: US AI laws
| Jurisdiction | Instrument | Status | Legal force | Applies from | Recorded duties | Record | Applies to us ▾ | Owner | Notes | Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California (United States) | California SB 53 | In force | Binding | 2026-01-01 | 5 | Verified | https://aipolicytracker.org/policies/us-california-sb-53 | |||
| Colorado (United States) | Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189) | Adopted | Binding | 2027-01-01 | 5 | Not yet verified | https://aipolicytracker.org/policies/us-colorado-automated-decision-making-technology-act | |||
| Illinois (United States) | Illinois AI Video Interview Act | In force | Binding | 2020-01-01 | 0 | Verified | https://aipolicytracker.org/policies/us-illinois-artificial-intelligence-video-interview-act | |||
| Illinois (United States) | Illinois HB 3773 (AI in employment, Human Rights Act amendment) | In force | Binding | 2026-01-01 | 0 | Verified | https://aipolicytracker.org/policies/us-illinois-hb-3773-ai-in-employment | |||
| New York (United States) | NYC Local Law 144 (automated employment decision tools) | In force | Binding | 2023-07-05 | 5 | Verified | https://aipolicytracker.org/policies/us-new-york-city-local-law-144-automated-employment-decision-tools | |||
| New York (United States) | New York RAISE Act (frontier model safety) | Adopted | Binding | 2027-01-01 | 0 | Verified | https://aipolicytracker.org/policies/us-new-york-raise-act |
Every US federal and state AI instrument on record, with its status and date as recorded. "Not yet verified" means a reviewer has not yet confirmed the record against the official source; check it before relying on the row.
Sheet: Recorded duties
| Duty | Category | Instrument | Jurisdiction | Who it binds | Nature | Source reference | Applies from | What it requires | Evidence a reviewer expects | ISO/IEC 42001 | NIST AI RMF | Verification | Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Large frontier developers must publish a frontier AI framework | Safety testing and evaluation | California SB 53 | California (United States) | General-purpose AI model provider | Legal requirement | Business and Professions Code, Chapter 25.1 (as added by SB 53) | 2026-01-01 | Large frontier developers must publish and maintain a framework describing how they incorporate national and international standards, assess catastrophic risk, | Published frontier AI framework | GOVERN 1.x; NIST AI 600-1 | Source-linked | https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-california-sb-53-frontier-ai-framework | |
| Report critical safety incidents to the Office of Emergency Services | Incident reporting and handling | California SB 53 | California (United States) | General-purpose AI model provider, Provider / developer | Legal requirement | Business and Professions Code, Chapter 25.1 (as added by SB 53) | 2026-01-01 | Frontier developers must report critical safety incidents to the California Office of Emergency Services within the statutory time limit after discovery, and th | Incident classification and reporting procedure | MANAGE 4.3 | Source-linked | https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-california-sb-53-critical-safety-incident-reporting | |
| Frontier developers must publish a transparency report before deploying a new frontier model | Transparency and disclosure | California SB 53 | California (United States) | General-purpose AI model provider, Provider / developer | Legal requirement | Business and Professions Code Section 22757.12 (as added by SB 53) | 2026-01-01 | Before or at the time a frontier developer deploys a new frontier model, or a substantially modified version, it must publish a transparency report on its websi | Published model transparency report; Redaction justification log | Annex A.8.2, A.8.3 | GOVERN 4.2, MAP 5.1, MEASURE 2.6 | Verified against the official source 26 Sep 2026 | https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-california-sb-53-transparency-report |
| Large frontier developers must send periodic summaries of catastrophic-risk assessments to the state | Safety testing and evaluation | California SB 53 | California (United States) | General-purpose AI model provider | Legal requirement | Business and Professions Code Section 22757.12 (as added by SB 53) | 2026-01-01 | A large frontier developer must transmit to the California Office of Emergency Services, on the periodic schedule the statute sets, a summary of any assessment | Internal-use catastrophic risk assessment summary sent to the Office of Emergency Services | Clause 9.1; Annex A.8.3 | MEASURE 2.6, MANAGE 1.2, GOVERN 4.3 | Verified against the official source 26 Sep 2026 | https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-california-sb-53-catastrophic-risk-assessment-summaries |
| Frontier developers must protect employees who report catastrophic-risk concerns | Governance and accountability | California SB 53 | California (United States) | General-purpose AI model provider, Provider / developer | Legal requirement | Labor Code Section 1107 (as added by SB 53) | 2026-01-01 | A frontier developer must not adopt rules or take action that prevent or retaliate against a covered employee for disclosing to the Attorney General, a federal | Whistleblower policy and employee notice; Anonymous reporting channel records | Clause 5.1, 7.4; Annex A.3.2 | GOVERN 4.1, GOVERN 4.3 | Verified against the official source 26 Sep 2026 | https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-california-sb-53-whistleblower-protections |
| Notify consumers before automated decision-making technology influences a consequential decision | Transparency and disclosure | Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189) | Colorado (United States) | Deployer / user organisation | Legal requirement | 2027-01-01 | Deployers must tell a consumer, before the decision is made, that automated decision-making technology will be used to make or materially influence a consequent | Source-linked | https://aipolicytracker.org/obligations/us-colorado-admt-advance-notice |
Sheet: US deadlines
| Date | Milestone | Instrument | Jurisdiction | Source reference | Status | Confidence | Note | Record |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2025-07-22 | AI Action Plan due (180 days) | EO 14179 | United States | Section 4 | passed | medium | Deadline for the Action Plan required by Section 4; the plan was published 23 July 2025. | https://aipolicytracker.org/policies/us-executive-order-14179 |
| 2026-01-01 | Operative date | California SB 53 | California (United States) | passed | medium | Most provisions operative; confirm on the official bill page. | https://aipolicytracker.org/policies/us-california-sb-53 | |
| 2026-01-01 | Effective date | Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA) | Texas (United States) | passed | high | Act takes effect. | https://aipolicytracker.org/policies/us-texas-responsible-ai-governance-act-traiga | |
| 2026-05-14 | Signed into law | Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189) | Colorado (United States) | passed | medium | Governor signed SB 26-189 (secondary reporting; confirm against the bill history). | https://aipolicytracker.org/policies/us-colorado-automated-decision-making-technology-act | |
| 2027-01-01 | Applies to consequential decisions made on or after this date | Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189) | Colorado (United States) | scheduled | medium | Effective date per secondary reporting on the enrolled bill; confirm on the Colorado General Assembly site. | https://aipolicytracker.org/policies/us-colorado-automated-decision-making-technology-act |
Document outline (DOCX)
- US AI laws by state: applicability matrix
- Our position
How to use it
- 1Request the files. Enter your name, company and work email in the form on this page. The XLSX and DOCX download links arrive by email and work for 7 days.
- 2Read the README page. It states the version (v1), the dataset it was built from and the licence, so anyone reviewing your copy knows which records it reflects.
- 3Check the duties against your situation. The "US AI laws", "Recorded duties" and "US deadlines" sheets list the recorded duties with their source references. Mark which apply to you and follow each link to the official text.
- 4Complete the document. Work through the DOCX sections (US AI laws by state: applicability matrix) and replace each placeholder with your organisation's answer.
- 5Keep the evidence and watch for new versions. Link each completed row to the evidence that supports it. When the law on record changes, this template gets a new version and a changelog on this page.
Duties this template covers (17)
Each is cited in the file with its source reference and a link back to the record.
- Large frontier developers must publish a frontier AI framework
- Report critical safety incidents to the Office of Emergency Services
- Frontier developers must publish a transparency report before deploying a new frontier model
- Large frontier developers must send periodic summaries of catastrophic-risk assessments to the state
- Frontier developers must protect employees who report catastrophic-risk concerns
- Notify consumers before automated decision-making technology influences a consequential decision
- Disclose the use of the technology and the principal reasons after an adverse consequential decision
- Offer meaningful human review of an adverse consequential decision
- Keep records of consequential decisions influenced by the technology for three years
- Developers must supply deployers with documentation of the technology
- Government agencies must disclose to consumers that they are interacting with an AI system
- Health-care providers must disclose the use of AI in patient services
Legal basis
Version history
| Version | Built | Dataset | What changed |
|---|---|---|---|
| v1 | c6967b988bb5 | First version, built from dataset c6967b988bb5. |
Only the latest version is served. A rebuild that changes the content adds a version; a rebuild that does not is skipped.
Frequently asked questions
What is in the US State AI Law Applicability Matrix?
Matrix of every US instrument on record with status and date. Recorded duties sheet for those instruments. US deadlines sheet. Document: overview table and a section for your position.
Which duties does it cite?
17 recorded duties from California SB 53, Colorado ADMT law (SB 26-189) and Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA), including Business and Professions Code, Chapter 25.1 (as added by SB 53), Business and Professions Code Section 22757.12 (as added by SB 53), Labor Code Section 1107 (as added by SB 53), Business and Commerce Code Section 551.051, Business and Commerce Code Section 551.052 and Business and Commerce Code Section 551.053. Each row links to the record, and the record to the official source.
Who is it for?
The duties it cites fall on deployer / user organisation, provider / developer and general-purpose ai model provider. Whoever owns AI governance for those roles usually completes it, with the system owner supplying the facts.
Is it free?
Yes. Request the XLSX and DOCX with your work email on this page; the download links arrive by email, valid for 7 days. No account and no charge. Licensed CC BY 4.0. You may use, adapt and share this template, including commercially, with attribution to aipolicytracker.org.
How will I know when it changes?
Version v1 was built on 5 October 2026. The library is rebuilt daily; when a change to the records reaches this template it gets the next version, a changelog below and an entry in the templates feed.
Does completing it make us compliant?
No. It is an informational resource, not legal advice; it helps produce the evidence a regulator, customer or auditor asks for. Whether a duty applies to you is a judgement the template cannot make.
Disclaimer: informational only, not legal advice. Verify every claim against the linked official sources and consult a qualified lawyer before acting.