State AGs fill the AI regulatory void
May 19, 2025 - As generative artificial intelligence (AI) technologies rapidly proliferate and permeate society, state attorneys general (AGs) have warned of potential AI misuse and legal violations. And while only California, Colorado, and Utah have enacted laws governing AI, the dearth of AI-specific laws has not prevented states from advising and taking AI-related action under existing law. Indeed, state AGs have indicated that they will utilize privacy, consumer protection, and anti-discrimination laws to regulate AI.
AGs are focused on how AI systems utilize personal identifying information, potentially facilitate fraud using deepfakes, operate relative to company representations, and could perpetrate bias and discrimination in decision-making processes. In January 2024, a bipartisan group of AGs sent a letter to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) warning of potential fraud where AI is used to imitate human voices in telemarketing campaigns. See Implications of Artificial Intelligence Technologies on Protecting Consumers from Unwanted Robocalls and Robotexts, Federal Communications Commission, CG Docket No. 23-362 (January 17, 2024).
While California, Colorado, and Utah will ramp up enforcement under their AI laws, businesses must be aware of regulatory risks from other states under traditional laws and ensure robust AI compliance measures. Since the FCC letter, AGs from California, Massachusetts, Oregon, New Jersey, and Texas have issued AI-specific guidance or taken AI-related enforcement actions that address common themes, despite not having AI-specific laws in their states.
California AG Rob Bonta has been among the most vocal state AGs on the use of AI. Earlier this year, AG Bonta issued two legal advisories warning that companies may be liable under California's Unfair Competition Law and Civil Rights Act if AI tools mislead consumers, deny access to services, or cause other discriminatory outcomes.
In particular, AG Bonta has highlighted the risks associated with using AI in the health care industry and hiring, where replacing trained professionals with opaque and unproven AI systems could result in actionable harm.
Massachusetts AG Joy Campbell was the first to issue formal guidance warning that AI systems could potentially run afoul of existing law. Specifically, companies risk violating the Massachusetts Consumer Protection Act by misrepresenting the reliability of an AI system or falsely advertising its quality, such as touting functionality that does not in fact exist.
AG Campbell also warns of fraud by misrepresenting "audio or video content of a person for the purpose of deceiving another to engage in a business transaction or supply personal information as if to a trusted business partner as in the case of deepfakes, voice cloning, or chatbots." Attorney General Advisory on the Application of the Commonwealth's Consumer Protection, Civil Rights, and Data Privacy Laws to Artificial Intelligence, Mass. Atty. Gen. (April 16, 2024).
There are also privacy risks under the "Standards for the Protection of Personal Information of Residents of the Commonwealth," requiring AI developers and deployers to take appropriate steps to safeguard personal information used within AI systems. Finally, the advisory warns that Massachusetts' Anti-Discrimination Law may be implicated if AI makes decisions based on "legally protected characteristics," such as race or gender.
Following suit, former Oregon AG Ellen Rosenblum issued AI guidance highlighting concerns with the unpredictability of AI outputs, noting that they can compromise privacy, affect fairness, obscure accountability, and impact trustworthiness. See What You Should Know About How Oregon's Laws May Affect Your Company's Use of Artificial Intelligence, Or. Atty. Gen (December 24, 2024). The lack of transparency in AI decision-making processes can make it difficult for humans to identify, understand, and correct such decisions. With these risks in mind, the guidance notes that the state will regulate AI under several laws.
The Oregon Unlawful Trade Practices Act prohibits misrepresentations in consumer transactions, including misrepresenting the characteristics, uses, benefits, or qualities of AI products, or using AI to falsely claim nonexistent sponsorships, approvals, or connections (such as artificial celebrity endorsements).
The Oregon Consumer Privacy Act guarantees a consumer's right to control the distribution of their personal data, which is particularly relevant for generative AI systems trained with such data. AI developers should obtain express consumer consent before using data to train AI systems.
Consumers must also be able to opt out of AI profiling when AI is used to make significant decisions, such as those pertaining to housing, education, or lending. The Oregon Consumer Information Protection Act also requires AI developers to safeguard personal information through reasonable cybersecurity measures.
Finally, like Massachusetts, Oregon warns of possible bias and anti-discrimination violations. The Oregon Equality Act prohibits discrimination based on protected classes and bars discrimination resulting from AI use, particularly in housing and public accommodations.
New Jersey AG Matthew Platkin launched a "Civil Rights and Technology Initiative" aimed at addressing discrimination and bias-based harassment risks associated with AI. As part of that effort, he published guidance to explain how the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD) may apply to "algorithmic discrimination" inherent in some AI systems. Guidance on Algorithmic Discrimination and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J. Atty. Gen (January 2025).
Through the LAD, New Jersey residents are protected from AI algorithmic discrimination by "covered entities," which include employers, housing providers, places of public accommodation, credit providers, and contractors, among others. Misuse of AI tools may violate the LAD in these areas. For example, in the employment context, automated decision-making tools have been used to determine whether an employee should be retained or terminated. While these tools streamline and simplify processes, their use may result in racial and gender discrimination based on the tools' design, training, or deployment.
Covered entities can violate the LAD even absent an intent to discriminate, such as by simply deploying an AI system developed and controlled by a third party. Specifically, tool deployment may violate the LAD if their use results in either disparate treatment or disparate impact based on protected characteristics. The law also provides recourse for affected individuals when AI decisions result in the preclusion or impediment of reasonable accommodations.
Texas AG Ken Paxton has taken the lead with action under traditional law enforcement. In September 2024, AG Paxton reached a settlement with health care technology company Pieces Technology (Pieces) under the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices-Consumer Protection Act (DTPA). See State of Texas v. Pieces Technologies Inc., Cause No. DC-24-13476 (2025). This represents the first AG settlement under a state consumer protection act involving generative AI.
Pieces uses AI to assist medical facilities by summarizing, charting, and drafting clinical notes. To measure accuracy, Pieces developed several metrics and benchmarks. The company advertised the accuracy of its AI product on its website, claiming a "critical hallucination rate" and "severe hallucination rate" of less than .001% and less than 1 per 100,000. AI hallucinations are instances where the output is false or misleading, and Pieces' metrics represent an extremely low incidence.
According to the AG's claims, these representations "may" have violated the DPTA because they were allegedly "false, misleading, or deceptive." Pieces denied any violation of the DPTA under the settlement terms.
The settlement requires that, should Pieces advertise the accuracy of AI products using metrics, it must disclose "the meaning or definition of such metric, benchmark, or similar measurement," and "the method, procedure, or any other process used by Pieces to calculate the metric, benchmark, or similar measurement used in … [its] marketing or advertising of its products and services."
Further, the company is prohibited from making false or misleading statements concerning AI products and must disclose any harmful or "potentially harmful" uses or misuses of its products. The settlement does not contain a monetary penalty; however, Pieces is required to demonstrate its compliance with the settlement upon the state's request for an indefinite period.
State AGs will scrutinize generative AI development and deployment within consumer protection, privacy, and anti-discrimination statutory frameworks. Companies using AI and conducting business with consumers in multiple states should ensure they are engaging in defensible privacy and cybersecurity practices in accordance with state laws. They need a firm grasp on the AI system's foundational model and capabilities and should perform a thorough risk assessment before employing AI products.
Businesses advertising AI products must be aware of state consumer protection acts and avoid false or misleading claims. The Federal Trade Commission has developed guidance for companies employing AI products and advertising their capabilities. See Keep Your AI Claims in Check, Federal Trade Commission (February 27, 2023).
Companies cannot assume they are insulated from liability simply because they are using AI without discriminatory intent. Several state AGs have signaled that enforcement actions could result from an AI system's disparate impact alone. Therefore, companies must carefully examine AI inputs and outputs and ensure the system is producing fair and unbiased results, particularly if legally protected characteristics such as age, gender, or race are implicated.
Companies considering implementing AI systems must prepare for potential exposure under a patchwork of state laws and should consult competent outside counsel accordingly. To mitigate against ever-expanding risk, all levels of decision-makers, including executives, IT staff, and in-house counsel, should be aware of AI risks and capabilities and involved in its implementation.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
12 minutes ago
- Times
Has remote working opened a global talent pool for businesses?
As competition for skilled staff intensifies, firms can take advantage of a 24/7 workforce across time zones Caption here pls.... Major events in recent years have resulted in more professionals working in a flexible mix of home and office settings, even across borders – but forward-thinking employers have enjoyed the benefits of hybrid setups for much longer. Now, more businesses are beginning to recognise the considerable potential upsides of taking a similar approach, with a borderless workforce. In fields like tech, fintech and creative industries such as gaming – where competition for talent is especially fierce – being able to search in a far larger talent pool from all over the world can make a significant difference when it comes to successful recruitment. Offering the ideal candidate the flexibility to work where they choose also makes them far more likely to say yes. For companies weighing economic pressures and geopolitical uncertainty, a remote workforce can offer a compelling solution to persistent hiring headaches – but there are wider benefits too. With technology powering a round-the-clock business culture, organisations that are able to keep projects moving by handing them off across time zones gain a serious edge over competitors. Productivity doesn't stop at close of play. This is before the additional practical incentives are considered – reduced office costs, regionally adjusted remuneration rates and the ability to have local teams engaging directly with international clients. Secondary factors also come into play. For companies focused on ESG, operating in a more sustainable way through distributed teams can become a meaningful part of their environmental and social impact profile. Of course, managing teams across multiple world regions brings challenges of its own. From embedding a brand's ethos and rolling out consistent working practices, to ensuring full compliance with local tax and employment law, complexity can multiply quickly. One of the fastest-growing HR tech companies in the world, Deel has the expertise to help organisations make this kind of transformation a reality. Deel's intuitive platform cross-references legal frameworks across more than 100 countries, giving businesses everything they need to hire internationally at speed and scale – without the need to set up full operations in each region or wade through regulatory red tape. Instead of hiring local professional employer organisations in every new market, Deel offers businesses a single, legally compliant, tech-led solution. Its Global Payroll platform, for instance, consolidates payroll across multiple countries into one streamlined system – easy to update, monitor and use for data reporting. Valued at $12 billion [£9.4 billion] in its most recent funding round, Deel supports over 35,000 businesses in more than 150 countries. With this extensive global reach, Deel has become a leading voice in international employment trends. Its 2024 report, The State of Global Hiring , offers valuable insights into how and where companies are building cross-border teams. Deel works with startups, scale-ups and larger enterprises alike, providing a single platform to manage everything from onboarding to offboarding – including contracts, tax documentation and global payroll – with efficiency and full compliance. Acting as both legal shield and operational backbone, Deel enables UK companies to build global teams without the friction of international hiring. It's a way to sidestep domestic talent shortages and fill key skill gaps – bringing the future of work within reach today. This a commercial article paid for by our advertising partners Visit to request a free demonstration and see how your business could be transformed
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Dollar slides on easing trade tensions, Fed expectations
SINGAPORE, June 12 (Reuters) - The dollar slid on Thursday on further signs that U.S. President Donald Trump may adopt a softer stance in tariff negotiations and heightened expectations of Federal Reserve rate cuts. Trump said on Wednesday he would be willing to extend a July 8 deadline for completing trade talks with countries before higher U.S. tariffs are imposed. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent suggested earlier that the Trump administration may offer extensions from a July trade deal deadline for countries negotiating in good faith. The remarks renewed dollar weakness, lifting the euro to a seven-week high. It last bought $1.1525. The greenback lost 0.43% against the yen and 0.34% against the Swiss franc to last trade at 143.98 and 0.81725, respectively. Against a basket of currencies, the dollar fell to its weakest since April 22 at 98.327. "It's hard to tell whether there is a masterplan behind this, but common sense would suggest that President Trump is trying to create a level of urgency in terms of trade negotiations," said Rodrigo Catril, senior currency strategist at National Australia Bank. "I think the market, in terms of the size of the moves, is becoming a little bit more sanguine about what this all means... the market is also very wary that the picture could change quite dramatically in a week's time or two weeks' time." Elsewhere, sterling was up 0.38% to $1.3588. The Australian dollar ticked up 0.05% to $0.6506, while the New Zealand dollar rose 0.1% to $0.6033. On Wednesday, data showed U.S. consumer prices rose less than expected in May, leading traders to ramp up bets of a Fed cut as early as September and keeping pressure on the dollar. Thursday's producer price index data will be the next test for markets. The offshore yuan was last a touch stronger at 7.1953 per dollar, helped slightly by news that a fragile truce in the U.S.-China trade war was restored as both sides reached a deal following talks in London this week. "Full details have not been published, and it remains unclear if the talks brought the two largest economies closer to productive cooperation," said Mantas Vanagas, senior economist at Westpac. The euro was clinging to strong gains on Thursday, having jumped against most other currencies in the previous session. Against the yen, the common currency last stood at 165.88 having risen to its firmest since October at 166.42 on Thursday. It was up 0.13% against the Aussie , extending a 0.9% gain from Thursday, and had also touched a one-month high of 84.88 pence overnight . While there was no immediate trigger behind the moves, analysts say the euro has over the past week drawn support from hawkish European Central Bank (ECB) rhetoric. Last week, the ECB cut interest rates as expected but hinted at a pause in its year-long easing cycle after inflation finally returned to its 2% target. "Expectations of fewer previously expected ECB rate cuts have lent some support to the euro," said Carol Kong, a currency strategist at Commonwealth Bank of Australia. That contrasts with the likely resumption of a Fed easing cycle later this year, and as Trump has repeatedly called for U.S. rates to be lowered. Trump said last week that a decision on the next Fed chief will be coming soon, adding that a good Fed chair would lower interest rates. The euro has risen nearly 11% for the year thus far, helped in part by a weaker dollar and as investors pour money into European markets in a move away from the U.S.
BBC News
an hour ago
- BBC News
Aukus: US to review submarine pact as part of 'America First' agenda
The US has launched a review of its multi-billion dollar submarine deal with the UK and Australia, saying the security pact must fit its "America First" the trilateral pact, widely seen as a response to the growing power of China, Australia is to get its first nuclear-powered subs from the US, before the allies create a new fleet by sharing cutting-edge Australia and the UK - which did its own review last year - have sought to play down news of the US probe, saying it is natural for a new administration to move comes as Australia faces pressure from the White House to lift its military spending, from 2% to 3.5% of GDP, a push so far resisted by Canberra. The agreement - worth £176bn ($239bn; A$368bn) - was signed in 2021, when all three countries involved had different leaders."The department is reviewing Aukus as part of ensuring that this initiative of the previous administration is aligned with the President's America First agenda," a US defence official told the BBC."As [US Defense] Secretary [Pete] Hegseth has made clear, this means ensuring the highest readiness of our servicemembers, that allies step up fully to do their part for collective defense, and that the defense industrial base is meeting our needs."The review will be headed up Elbridge Colby, who has previously been critical of Aukus, in a speech last year questioning why the US would give away "this crown jewel asset when we most need it".Defence Minister Richard Marles, speaking to local Australian media on Thursday morning local time, said he was optimistic the deal would continue. "I'm very confident this is going to happen," he told ABC Radio Melbourne."You just need to look at the map to understand that Australia absolutely needs to have a long-range submarine capability."Some in Australia have been lobbying for the country to develop a more independent defence strategy, but Marles said it was important to "stick to a plan" - a reference to the previous government's controversial cancellation of a submarine deal with France in favour of Australian government spokesperson told the BBC it was "natural" that the new administration would "examine" the agreement, adding the UK had also recently finished a review of the security pact between the long-standing allies. There is "clear and consistent" support for the deal across the "full political spectrum" in the US, they said, adding Australia looked forward to "continuing our close cooperation with the Trump Administration on this historic project".A UK defence spokesperson told the BBC it was "understandable" for a new administration to look at the deal, "just as the UK did last year". Aukus is a "landmark security and defence partnership with two of our closest allies", the spokesperson said, and "one of the most strategically important partnerships in decades, supporting peace and security in the Indo-Pacific and Euro-Atlantic".
