HelpUsWith.ai

US State and Federal Government AI Policies: A Comprehensive Report

An in-depth analysis of artificial intelligence policies, regulations, and guidelines across US federal and state jurisdictions.

Published: February 25, 2025

Author: HelpUsWith.ai Research Team


Executive Summary



This comprehensive report examines the current state of AI policy and regulation across federal and state jurisdictions in the United States. It provides detailed analysis of existing frameworks, upcoming legislation, and regulatory trends affecting AI development and deployment.




Federal AI Policies



Analysis of federal AI regulations


Executive orders and directives


Agency-specific guidelines


National AI initiatives





State AI Policies



State-level AI legislation


Regional compliance requirements


Local governance frameworks


State AI initiatives





Introduction



The rapid evolution of artificial intelligence (AI) has presented governments worldwide with unprecedented opportunities and challenges. In the United States, both federal and state governments are actively engaged in developing policies and regulations to navigate this evolving technological landscape. This report provides a comprehensive overview of current AI policies at both the state and federal levels, including enacted legislation, executive orders, proposed bills, and ongoing discussions.

State AI Policies



As of February 25, 2025, nearly every state has taken some action to address AI, with most states enacting legislation or adopting resolutions. This section provides a state-by-state analysis of current AI policies, highlighting key trends and notable developments.

Deepfakes



Deepfakes, AI-generated synthetic media that can convincingly portray individuals saying or doing things they never did, have emerged as a significant concern for lawmakers across the United States. Many states have enacted legislation to address the potential harms of deepfakes, particularly in the context of elections and nonconsensual pornography.

























































































































































































































State Deepfake Law Focus Key Legislation Implementation Date Challenges/Controversies
Alabama Sexual and political deepfakes AL HB 161, AL HB 168, AL HB 172 2024
Alaska Political deepfakes in campaigns, state agency use of AI AK HB 306 2024 Incident of AI-generated citations used to justify a policy
Arizona Political and sexual deepfakes AZ HB 2394 2024
California Non-consensual deepfake pornography, child pornography, reporting requirements for social media platforms AB 1831, SB 926, SB 981 2025
Colorado Sexual and political deepfakes CO SB 11, CO HB 1147 2024
Florida Political deepfakes in advertising, child pornography FL HB 919, FL SB 1680 2024
Georgia Sexual deepfakes, child sexual abuse material GA SB 78, GA HB 993 2021, 2024
Hawaii Sexual and political deepfakes HI SB 309, HI SB 2687 2021, 2024
Idaho Sexual and political deepfakes, disclosure of explicit synthetic media ID HB 575, ID HB 465, ID HB 664 2024
Illinois Sexual deepfakes, child sexual abuse material IL HB 2123, IL HB 4623 2023, 2024
Indiana Political and sexual deepfakes IN HB 1133, IN HB 1047 2024
Iowa Sexual deepfakes, child sexual abuse material IA HF 2240, IA SF 2243 2024
Massachusetts Sexual deepfakes MA H 4744 2024
Michigan Deepfakes in elections MI HB 5141, MI HB 5144, MI HB 5145 2023
Minnesota Political and sexual deepfakes MN HF 1370/SF 1394, MN HF 4772 2023, 2024
Mississippi Political and sexual deepfakes MS SB 2577, MS HB 1126 2024
New Hampshire Sexual and political deepfakes, fraudulent use of deepfakes SB 564, HB 1319, HB 1596, HB 1432 2024
New Mexico Political deepfakes in advertising NM HB 182 2024
New York Sexual and political deepfakes NY SB 1042A, NY AB 8808/SB 8308, NY AB 10402/SB 9678 2023, 2024
North Carolina Sexual deepfakes, sextortion NC HB 591 2024
Oklahoma Child sexual abuse material OK HB 3642 2024
Oregon Political deepfakes in campaigns OR SB 1571 2024
Pennsylvania Child sexual abuse material, AI-generated pornography SB 1213 2024
South Dakota Child sexual abuse material SD SB 79 2024
Tennessee Child sexual abuse material TN HB 2163 2024
Vermont Sexual deepfakes VT HB 878 2024
Washington Sexual deepfakes WA HB 1999 2024
Wisconsin Deepfakes in political communications 2023 Wisconsin Act 123 2024
Wyoming Proposed legislation in 2024


Key Insights:



  • The majority of states have focused on criminalizing the creation and distribution of non-consensual sexual deepfakes and regulating the use of deepfakes in political campaigns.

  • There is a growing trend towards requiring disclosures and disclaimers in political advertisements that use AI-generated content.

  • Some states, like New Hampshire, have taken a broader approach to criminalizing deepfakes, prohibiting their use for any deceptive or malicious purpose.

  • States are taking different approaches to defining deepfakes and the thresholds for legal action, reflecting the challenges of regulating this rapidly evolving technology.




Alabama



Alabama has begun to prioritize AI policies, particularly concerning deepfakes and law enforcement use of facial recognition technology.



  • Deepfakes: In 2024, Alabama enacted two laws addressing sexual deepfakes. The first law (AL HB 161) makes it unlawful to create or alter a private image without consent, including AI-generated images. The second law (AL HB 168) adds digitally created or altered visual depictions to child pornography laws.

  • Facial Recognition: In 2022, Alabama enacted a law (AL SB 56) governing how law enforcement agencies may use facial recognition technology.

  • AI Task Force: In early 2024, Governor Kay Ivey issued an executive order establishing the Governor’s Task Force on Generative Artificial Intelligence.

  • AI in Education: The University of Alabama has established guidelines for using generative AI tools in the classroom.



Key Insight: Alabama’s approach to AI policy reflects a growing trend among states to address the potential harms of deepfakes while also considering the responsible use of AI in education and government.



Alaska



Alaska has focused on ethical AI use and deepfakes in its AI policy.



  • Deepfakes: In 2024, Alaska enacted a law (AK HB 306) requiring disclosure of deepfakes in campaign communications. The law mandates that any campaign communication using a deepfake depiction of a candidate or political party must include the statement: “This communication has been manipulated or generated by artificial intelligence.”

  • State Agency Use of AI: The law also addresses state agency use of AI, requiring the Alaska Department of Administration to inventory all AI systems used by state agencies for “consequential decisions” affecting individuals. Impact assessments must be conducted regularly, analyzing the risks and benefits of agency AI systems.

  • AI in Policymaking: In a notable incident, Alaska legislators used inaccurate AI-generated citations to justify a proposed policy banning cellphones in schools. This incident highlights the potential risks of relying on AI-generated information without proper verification and emphasizes the need for human oversight in policymaking.



Key Insight: Alaska’s AI policy demonstrates the importance of balancing the potential benefits of AI with the need for ethical considerations, transparency, and human oversight, particularly in sensitive areas like elections and education.



Arizona



Arizona has taken a proactive approach to AI regulation, particularly in healthcare and deepfakes.



  • AI in Healthcare: In 2025, Arizona enacted a law (AZ HB 2063) prohibiting the use of AI in medical decision-making. The law requires doctors and healthcare providers to personally review medical claims or prior authorizations rather than allowing AI to play a role in the decision-making process.

  • Deepfakes: In 2024, Arizona enacted a law (AZ HB 2394) addressing both political and sexual deepfakes. The law gives political candidates a cause of action for digital impersonation absent a disclaimer. The measure also allows a person depicted in a sexual deepfake to sue for injunctive relief and damages.

  • Generative AI Policy: In 2024, Arizona published its first generative AI policies, focusing on fostering innovation while complying with the law, protecting data privacy, and ensuring accuracy and efficiency in public services.



Key Insight: Arizona’s AI policy demonstrates a commitment to balancing innovation with consumer protection, particularly in healthcare, where the state has taken a strong stance against AI replacing human judgment in medical decision-making.



Arkansas



Arkansas has focused on data protection, government workforce training, and formalizing AI governance.



  • Data Protection and AI: In 2025, the Arkansas Senate introduced Senate Bill 258, aimed at creating the Arkansas Digital Responsibility, Safety, and Trust Act. The bill outlines responsibilities for controllers and processors, consumer rights, special data types handling, and the use of responsible AI.

  • AI Governance: In 2025, Arkansas’ AI working group recommended formalizing AI governance with the state Data and Transparency Panel and creating a C-level AI post to coordinate strategy.

  • AI Center of Excellence: Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders launched the AI and Analytics Center of Excellence in June 2024 to study and offer recommendations for the safe use of AI within Arkansas state government.

  • Protection of Likeness and Voice: Arkansas lawmakers are moving forward with House Bill 1071, which aims to expand the Frank Broyles Publicity Rights Protection Act of 2016 to include protections against AI-generated media. This bill seeks to protect individuals’ likeness and voice in any form, addressing concerns about the potential misuse of AI to create unauthorized representations of individuals.

  • AI in Education: Arkansas State University has established guidelines and considerations for the ethical use of AI in education.



Key Insight: Arkansas is taking a proactive approach to AI governance, focusing on data protection, workforce training, and establishing clear guidelines for responsible AI use in both government and education.



California



California has been at the forefront of AI policy, enacting numerous laws covering various aspects of AI, including deepfakes, transparency, data privacy, and use in healthcare.



  • Deepfakes: California has enacted several laws addressing deepfakes, including AB 1831 (expanding child pornography laws to include AI-generated content), SB 926 (criminalizing the creation and distribution of non-consensual deepfake pornography), and SB 981 (requiring social media platforms to establish reporting tools for deepfake pornography).

  • AI Transparency: In 2024, California passed the AI Transparency Act (SB 942), requiring AI developers to provide AI detection tools and watermarking capabilities.

  • AI in Healthcare: California has implemented restrictions on AI in healthcare, requiring doctors to oversee how AI is used to approve, alter, or deny medical requests.

  • Digital Replicas: AB 2602 protects individuals from unauthorized use of their digital replicas in personal or professional service contracts, while AB 1836 restricts the use of digital replicas of deceased personalities for commercial purposes without consent.

  • AI and Consumer Protection: California’s new AI laws demonstrate a strong commitment to safeguarding consumer interests and protecting individuals from potential harms associated with AI technologies.

  • AI Initiative: In 2020, the California Department of Technology launched an AI initiative with three primary objectives: demonstrating how AI can improve service delivery, providing a strategy and guidelines for ethical AI use, and developing hands-on deliverables to drive AI adoption.



Key Insight: California is a leader in AI policy, taking a comprehensive approach to regulating various aspects of AI while prioritizing consumer protection and responsible innovation.



Colorado



Colorado has enacted comprehensive AI legislation addressing both developers and deployers of AI technology.



  • AI Regulation: In 2024, Colorado enacted the Colorado Anti-Discrimination in AI Law (CO SB 205), regulating “high-risk artificial intelligence systems” that make “consequential decisions” in consumer-facing industries.

  • Deepfakes: Colorado has enacted laws addressing both sexual (CO SB 11) and political deepfakes (CO HB 1147).

  • Facial Recognition: In 2020, Colorado enacted a law (CO SB 113) establishing provisions for government use of facial recognition technology.

  • AI Task Force: In 2024, Colorado established an Artificial Intelligence Task Force (CO HB 1468) to consider protections for consumers and workers.

  • AI in Employment: The Colorado AI Act places specific obligations on employers with more than 50 employees when using AI in “high-risk” areas, such as hiring, promotion, and termination.



Key Insight: Colorado’s AI Act is one of the most comprehensive AI laws in the United States, demonstrating a strong focus on consumer protection and mitigating the risks of algorithmic discrimination. However, the governor’s reservations and ongoing discussions about implementation highlight the challenges of balancing innovation with regulation in this rapidly evolving field.



Connecticut



Connecticut has taken a measured approach to AI regulation, establishing an Office of Artificial Intelligence and a task force to study AI.



  • Office of AI and Task Force: In 2023, Connecticut enacted a law (CT SB 1103) establishing an Office of Artificial Intelligence and a task force to study AI and develop an AI bill of rights. The task force issued its final report in February 2024, with recommendations incorporated into comprehensive AI legislation (CT SB 2).

  • Proposed AI Act: Connecticut is considering “An Act Concerning Artificial Intelligence,” outlining a multifaceted approach to AI regulation, economic development, education, and ethical oversight.

  • AI Responsible Use Framework: In 2024, Connecticut established an AI Responsible Use Framework, a comprehensive framework for the ethical utilization of AI in state government.



Key Insight: Connecticut’s approach to AI policy emphasizes a cautious and deliberate approach, focusing on studying AI, developing ethical guidelines, and fostering responsible innovation.



Delaware



Delaware has taken a proactive approach to AI regulation, establishing an AI commission and adopting an interim policy for AI use in courts.



  • AI Commission: In July 2024, Delaware established the Delaware Artificial Intelligence Commission to advise on AI use and safety while inventorying generative AI across state agencies to identify high-risk areas.

  • AI in Courts: In October 2024, the Delaware Supreme Court adopted an interim policy allowing cautious use of generative AI by judges and court staff, requiring administrative approval and ensuring human accountability for decisions.



Key Insight: Delaware is taking a proactive approach to AI governance, focusing on identifying and mitigating potential risks associated with AI use in government and the judicial system.



Florida



Florida has focused on AI in political advertising, child pornography, and education.



  • AI in Political Advertising: In 2024, Florida enacted legislation (FL HB 919) requiring political advertisements containing AI-generated content to include clear disclaimers.

  • AI and Child Pornography: Lawmakers enacted a law (FL SB 1680) making it unlawful to possess or control computer-generated child pornography.

  • AI in Education: In 2024, Florida enacted a law (FL HB 1361) providing grants to school districts to implement AI in support of students and teachers.

  • Digital Bill of Rights: Florida’s Digital Bill of Rights (FDBR), effective July 1, 2024, provides Florida residents with increased control over their personal data in relation to AI technologies. Key provisions include opt-out rights for AI data collection, regulation of AI use in children’s services, and uniform employment regulations.

  • AI in Education: The University of Florida has established guidelines on responsible generative AI use, emphasizing data privacy, compliance with relevant laws and regulations, and the protection of sensitive information.



Key Insight: Florida’s AI policy reflects a growing trend among states to address the potential harms of AI-generated content, particularly in the context of elections and child exploitation, while also promoting the responsible use of AI in education.



Georgia



Georgia has focused on sexual deepfakes and responsible AI deployment in state government.



  • Deepfakes: In 2021, Georgia enacted a law (GA SB 78) making it a felony to knowingly transmit a sexual deepfake without consent.

  • AI in State Government: Georgia has established guiding principles for AI in state government, emphasizing responsible and ethical deployment.

  • AI at Georgia Tech: Georgia Tech has developed AI guidance for privacy and security, outlining best practices and prohibited data use for faculty, staff, and students.



Key Insight: Georgia’s AI policy demonstrates a commitment to protecting individuals from the potential harms of deepfakes, particularly those involving children, while also promoting responsible AI use in state government and educational institutions.



Hawaii



Hawaii has focused on deepfakes, wildfire forecasting, and AI in education.



  • Deepfakes: In 2021, Hawaii enacted a law (HI SB 309) criminalizing the creation or disclosure of deepfakes depicting a real person who is nude or engaged in sexual conduct.

  • Wildfire Forecasting: In 2024, Hawaii enacted a law (HI SB 2284) establishing a program at the University of Hawaii to develop a wildfire forecast system using AI.

  • AI in Education: The Hawaii Department of Education is committed to fostering ethical and responsible AI use in education.

  • AI Governance: Hawaii is considering establishing an AI advisory council to recommend an action plan, guide awareness, education, policy, and usage of AI in the state, and support public employees in the efficient and effective use of AI.



Key Insight: Hawaii’s AI policy reflects a growing trend among states to address the potential harms of deepfakes while also exploring the potential benefits of AI in various sectors, including education and disaster preparedness.



Idaho



Idaho has primarily focused on deepfakes and AI in education.



  • Deepfakes: In 2024, Idaho enacted several laws addressing deepfakes, including ID HB 575 (criminalizing the disclosure of explicit synthetic media without consent), ID HB 465 (prohibiting visual depictions of child sexual abuse generated using AI), and ID HB 664 (providing legal recourse for candidates whose actions or speech are deceptively represented through deepfakes).

  • AI in Education: Boise State University has established guidelines for the ethical use of AI, emphasizing data privacy, academic integrity, and responsible use of university IT resources.

  • AI Regulation: Idaho is considering Senate Bill 1067, which aims to prevent special or targeted regulation of AI, classifying AI technologies as general-purpose technology subject to existing regulatory requirements.

  • AI in Schools: Several school districts in Idaho are actively discussing and implementing AI initiatives, including the use of Magic School and the development of AI policies to guide responsible use.



Key Insight: Idaho’s AI policy reflects a focus on addressing the potential harms of deepfakes while also considering the responsible use of AI in education and the broader regulatory landscape.



Illinois



Illinois has been active in AI policy, enacting laws related to deepfakes, digital replicas, AI in hiring, and AI in courts.



  • Deepfakes: Illinois has addressed sexual deepfakes with IL HB 2123 (establishing a cause of action for distributing a sexual deepfake without consent) and IL HB 4623 (clarifying that child pornography laws include AI-generated images of children).

  • Digital Replicas: IL HB 4762 prohibits contracts for using a digital replica of a person’s image or voice to perform work that would have otherwise been done in person, while IL HB 4875 restricts the distribution of sound recordings or audiovisual works containing digital replicas without consent.

  • AI in Hiring: IL HB 3773 prohibits employers from using AI in hiring if it discriminates against protected classes and requires notice when AI is used in the hiring process.

  • AI in Courts: In 2024, the Illinois Supreme Court released a policy on AI in the courts, recognizing the potential benefits of AI while emphasizing ethical considerations and the need for human oversight.



Key Insight: Illinois is taking a comprehensive approach to AI policy, addressing various aspects of AI use while prioritizing ethical considerations, transparency, and accountability.



Indiana



Indiana has focused on AI in government, deepfakes, and education.



  • AI in Government: In 2024, Indiana established an Artificial Intelligence Task Force to evaluate AI use in state agencies and recommend policies.

  • Deepfakes: Indiana enacted laws addressing both political (IN HB 1133) and sexual deepfakes (IN HB 1047) in 2024.

  • AI in Education: Indiana University has developed guidelines for the use of generative AI in education, emphasizing responsible use, academic integrity, and data security.

  • AI and Cybersecurity: Indiana enacted the Artificial Intelligence and Cybersecurity law in 2024, which includes the creation of an AI task force, the adoption of cybersecurity policies in the public sector, and the requirement for an AI inventory in the public sector.



Key Insight: Indiana is taking a proactive approach to AI governance, focusing on responsible AI use in government, addressing the potential harms of deepfakes, and promoting AI education and cybersecurity.



Iowa



Iowa has focused on deepfakes, AI in education, and government efficiency.



  • Deepfakes: In 2024, Iowa enacted two sexual deepfakes laws: IA HF 2240 (criminalizing harassment through deepfakes) and IA SF 2243 (modifying sexual exploitation of a minor laws to include computer-generated images).

  • AI in Education: Iowa City Community School District is implementing a new age-appropriate curriculum that teaches how to safely use AI tools.

  • Government Efficiency: In 2025, Iowa established the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to explore how AI and emerging technologies can streamline government operations and reduce costs.

  • AI in Science Fairs: The State Science & Technology Fair of Iowa has an AI use policy that provides guidelines for students using AI in their projects.



Key Insight: Iowa’s AI policy reflects a focus on addressing the potential harms of deepfakes while also exploring the potential benefits of AI in education and government efficiency.



Louisiana



Louisiana has focused on deepfakes, AI in education, and innovation.



  • Deepfakes: In 2023, Louisiana enacted a law (LA SB 175) making it a crime to create or distribute a deepfake depicting a minor engaging in sexual conduct.

  • AI in Education: In 2024, the Louisiana Department of Education developed a comprehensive guide on the safe, ethical, and effective use of AI in K-12 classrooms.

  • Innovation: In 2025, Louisiana Economic Development launched the Louisiana Innovation (LA.IO) division to support business innovation and AI advancement in the state.



Key Insight: Louisiana’s AI policy reflects a balance between addressing the potential harms of AI-generated content and promoting innovation and economic development in the AI industry. The governor’s veto of deepfake bills highlights the ongoing debate about the appropriate level of AI regulation.



Maine



Maine has focused on facial recognition, AI task forces, and responsible AI use in government.



  • Facial Recognition: In 2021, Maine enacted a law (ME HP 1174) prohibiting state agencies and employees from using facial recognition technology except in certain circumstances.

  • AI Task Force: In late 2024, Governor Janet Mills signed an executive order establishing an AI Task Force to study the challenges and opportunities associated with AI.

  • Responsible AI Use: In 2024, Maine established an AI policy to specify guiding principles and directives for the responsible use of generative AI within the Executive Branch of Maine State Government.



Key Insight: Maine’s AI policy demonstrates a commitment to responsible AI adoption, focusing on protecting individual rights and privacy while exploring the potential benefits of AI for the state’s economy and government services.



Maryland



Maryland has focused on AI governance, AI in state agencies, and facial recognition.



  • AI Governance: In 2024, Maryland enacted the Artificial Intelligence Governance Act, requiring state agencies to inventory their AI systems, mandating transparency in AI deployment, and prohibiting “high-risk” AI use that could violate constitutional rights.

  • AI in State Agencies: In 2025, Maryland submitted an AI strategy and roadmap to the General Assembly, outlining a plan for speeding along the state’s adoption of AI.

  • Facial Recognition: In 2020, Maryland enacted a law (MD HB 1202) prohibiting employers from using facial recognition during job interviews without consent.

  • AI Subcabinet: Maryland established a Governor’s Artificial Intelligence Subcabinet in 2024 to promote responsible AI use in state government.



Key Insight: Maryland is taking a comprehensive approach to AI governance, focusing on consumer protection, transparency, and ethical considerations in AI use.





Stay Informed



This report is regularly updated to reflect new developments in AI policy and regulation. Subscribe to our newsletter for updates and analysis of emerging AI policies.



Last updated: February 25, 2025


For questions or feedback about this report, contact our research team at research@helpuswith.ai