AI chatbot legislation is moving fast. Thirteen states have acted.

There is no federal law specifically governing AI chatbots, however, the states are not waiting. 13 have enacted chatbot regulations with nearly 30 states having proposed or moving forward legislation, and four thematic areas have taken shape across the board.


The incidents driving this legislation are real. People, including young teenagers, have died by suicide after forming intense relationships with chatbots. A survey last year found 1 in 5 individuals who took financial advice from AI lost at least $100. And xAI’s Grok came under fire for very easily generating non-consensual explicit images including minors. While the TAKE IT DOWN Act is meant to address the last example, no other federal law is designed around the specific risks that companion chatbots pose. Here is what the state laws share and where they diverge.

1. Mental health and crisis prevention protocols

[8 of 14 laws] These bills require companies to have protocols in place for physical harm risks. Most go further, requiring chatbots to recognize suicidal or self-harm ideation and direct users to crisis resources. Whether that intervention is sufficient remains an open research question. Helpline utilization is already low, and more research is needed to determine the best way to support those experiencing a crisis.

California
SB 243Crisis ideation plans required; must connect users to a crisis service provider. Protocols posted publicly.
Georgia
SB 540Crisis ideation plans required; must connect users to the National Suicide Hotline.
Idaho
SB 1297Crisis ideation plans required; must connect users to a crisis service provider.
Iowa
SF 2417Crisis ideation plans required; must connect users to a crisis service provider.
Nebraska
LB 525Crisis ideation plans required; must connect users to a crisis service provider.
New York
GBL Article 47Crisis ideation plans required; must connect users to a crisis service provider.
Oregon
SB 1546Crisis ideation plans required; must connect users to the National Suicide Hotline. Protocols posted publicly.
Washington
HB 2225Crisis ideation plans required; must connect users to a crisis service provider. Protocols posted publicly.
Connecticut
Public Act No. 26-15No crisis provisions included.
Maine (LD 1727)
LD 1727No crisis provisions included.
Maine (LD 2082)
HP 1397No crisis provisions included.
New Hampshire
HB 143No crisis provisions included.
Tennessee
SB 1580No crisis provisions included.
Utah
HB 452No crisis provisions included.

2. Minor protections

[8 of 14 laws] Minors’ prefrontal cortices are still developing, making impulse control, decision making, and distinguishing AI from human relationships harder. Most bills respond with more frequent AI disclosures and mandatory break reminders for prolonged use. They also prohibit using AI to simulate emotional dependence, romantic or sexual content, or reward systems designed to keep minors engaged against their own intent.

California
SB 243Disclosure every 3 hours with break reminders. Bans explicit content, manipulation, and deceptive AI behavior. No reward loops or praise designed to encourage continued use.
Connecticut
Public Act No. 26-15Bans explicit content, manipulation, and deceptive AI behavior.
Georgia
SB 540Disclosure every hour with break reminders. Bans explicit content, manipulation, and deceptive AI behavior. No reward loops or praise designed to encourage continued use. Parental controls required.
Idaho
SB 1297Disclosure every 3 hours with break reminders. Bans explicit content, manipulation, and deceptive AI behavior. No reward loops or praise designed to encourage continued use. Parental controls required.
Iowa
SF 2417Disclosure every 3 hours with break reminders. Bans explicit content, manipulation, and deceptive AI behavior. No reward loops or praise designed to encourage continued use. Parental controls required.
Nebraska
LB 525Disclosure every 3 hours with break reminders. Bans explicit content, manipulation, and deceptive AI behavior. No reward loops or praise designed to encourage continued use. Parental controls required.
New Hampshire
HB 143Criminalizes directing AI toward a child with intent to facilitate explicit conduct, drug use, or self-harm.
Oregon
SB 1546Disclosure every 3 hours with break reminders. Bans explicit content, manipulation, and deceptive AI behavior. No reward loops or praise designed to encourage continued use.
Washington
HB 2225Must disclose AI identity. Bans explicit content and manipulative engagement tactics. No reward loops or praise designed to encourage continued use.
Maine (LD 1727)
LD 1727No minor protections.
Maine (LD 2082)
HP 1397No minor protections.
New York
GBL Article 47No minor protections.
Tennessee
SB 1580No minor protections.
Utah
HB 452No minor protections.

3. Deception and manipulation prevention

[12 of 14 laws] The most common form of deception and manipulation prevention is notification and disclosure requirements. Users must be clearly informed when they are interacting with an AI system rather than a human. Beyond identity disclosure, regulators have focused on preventing exploitative engagement practices and commercial manipulation. These provisions reflect a shared regulatory instinct: AI chatbots should not mislead users, exploit psychological vulnerabilities, or obscure the commercial interests at play in an interaction.

California
SB 243AI disclosure required. Minors notified every 3 hours with break reminders. Platform must warn that companion chatbots may not be suitable for some minors.
Connecticut
Public Act No. 26-15AI disclosure required at least once per day at session start, and at least once per hour during any continuous interaction.
Georgia
SB 540AI disclosure required at session start or as persistent disclaimer, every 3 hours for adults, every hour if a minor is suspected. Manipulative engagement techniques prohibited for minors.
Idaho
SB 1297AI disclosure required at session start or as persistent disclaimer, every 3 hours. Manipulative engagement techniques prohibited for minors.
Iowa
SF 2417AI disclosure required at session start or as persistent disclaimer, every 3 hours. Manipulative engagement techniques prohibited for minors.
Maine (LD 1727)
LD 1727Disclosure required when AI is used in trade or commerce interactions.
Maine (LD 2082)
HP 1397Disclosure required for mental health services; must explain why AI is being used.
Nebraska
LB 525AI disclosure required at session start or as persistent disclaimer, every 3 hours. Manipulative engagement techniques prohibited for minors.
New York
GBL Article 47AI disclosure required before interaction and every 3 hours in 16pt bold font using a templated statement.
Oregon
SB 1546AI disclosure required. Minors notified every 3 hours with break reminders. Manipulative engagement techniques prohibited.
Tennessee
SB 1580Cannot advertise or represent that the system is able to act as a qualified mental health professional.
Utah
HB 452AI disclosure required at interaction start or every 7 days. Must also disclose any time a user directly asks if AI is involved.
Washington
HB 2225AI disclosure at session start, every 3 hours, and at each new session. Minors must be notified they are not talking to a human. Manipulative engagement techniques prohibited.
New Hampshire
HB 143No deception and manipulation prevention measures.

4. Private right of action

[7 of 14 laws] This is the sharpest dividing line across all the enacted laws. Seven states allow individual users to sue chatbot companies directly for harms; the rest rely on the state attorney general or other state agencies for enforcement. Two of those, Maine and Tennessee, have a private right of action under existing laws so the actual enforcement with AI chatbots is unclear. Federal bills currently under consideration do not include private right of action, which would create real tension with states who do include it.

California
SB 243Private right of action; $1,000 floor penalty per violation.
Maine (LD 1727)
LD 1727Private right of action under existing law; enforceable under the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act where economic loss can be proven.
New Hampshire
HB 143Private right of action; $1,000 floor penalty per violation.
New York
GBL Article 47Private right of action where physical or financial harm can be demonstrated.
Oregon
SB 1546Private right of action; $1,000 floor penalty per violation.
Tennessee
SB 1580Private right of action under existing law; enforceable under the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act where conditions are met.
Washington
HB 2225Private right of action; recovery of actual damages plus up to $25,000 in some cases.
Connecticut
Public Act No. 26-15No private right of action; Attorney General initiated enforcement only. All penalties deposited to the Suicide Prevention and Mental Health Crisis Lifeline Fund.
Georgia
SB 540No private right of action; Attorney General initiated enforcement only.
Idaho
SB 1297No private right of action; Attorney General initiated enforcement only.
Iowa
SF 2417No private right of action; Attorney General initiated enforcement only.
Maine (LD 2082)
HP 1397No private right of action; Attorney General initiated enforcement only.
Nebraska
LB 525No private right of action; Attorney General initiated enforcement only.
Utah
HB 452No private right of action; enforcement by the Division of Consumer Protection or Attorney General.

What to watch

Federal bills are advancing. Congress has several active proposals that include the state themes above. The three below are ones to watch.

Senate
GUARD Act
Would prohibit companies from providing companion chatbots to minors entirely, with mandatory age verification processes.
Senate
CHATBOT Act
Establishes family accounts and requires parental consent for children’s AI accounts, giving parents direct control.
House
SAFE BOTs Act
Closest to the state laws: crisis intervention plans, 3 hour transparency reminders, and a 4 year HHS study on chatbot effects on minors.

None of these bills allow private right of action. But if any passes with federal preemption language, it will directly conflict with the individual liability that the states in Section 4 have already made law.

If your organization deploys or procures AI that interacts with users, Trustible helps you track how regulations like these apply to your use cases, document your governance decisions, and stay current as requirements evolve. Request a demo.

Related posts

Governance comes before enforcement. See how Trustible works.