Included below:

• Consumer Data Protection & Data Privacy
• Artificial Intelligence (AI)
• Charitable Solicitation
• Nonprofit Governance
• Salary Disclosure

Interactive Map Instructions: State Legislation Tracker

Basic Navigation

1. Viewing the Map: The interactive map displays legislation across states regarding consumer data protection and data privacy.
2. Scrolling: Use the scroll bar on the right side of the map box to scroll down and see additional states or details that may not be visible in the initial view.
3. Pages: If there are multiple pages of information, use the navigation controls at the bottom of the map to move between pages. Click on page numbers or use the “Next” and “Previous” buttons to view additional states and legislation data.

Understanding the Map Features

1. State Information: Click on any state to see a quick preview of legislation status.
2. Viewing Legislation Details: Click on a state to display:
   • Bill number(s)
   • Brief summary of the legislation
   • Current status in the legislative process
3. Accessing Official Information: Click on any individual bill number within the popup to be redirected to the official state website for comprehensive information.

Consumer Data Protection & Data Privacy

Below is a comprehensive list of state activity. If you are interested in a broader overview of the issue, please read more here.

2025 Pending Legislation

Passed Legislation

Artificial Intelligence (AI)

PROPOSED LAWS:

New York AB 768, sponsored by Asm. Alex Bores, D-New York City, was introduced and referred to the Assembly Consumer Affairs and Protections Committee on January 8. Assemblymember Bores does not hold any ranking positions. The bill, titled the “New York Artificial Intelligence Consumer Protection Act,” would amend existing law to prevent the use of artificial intelligence algorithms to discriminate against protected classes. It would require developers and deployers of high-risk AI decision systems to implement risk management policies, conduct bias and governance audits, and provide transparency and documentation to ensure compliance with anti-discrimination laws. Additionally, the bill would mandate consumer notifications and provide mechanisms for consumers to correct data and appeal adverse decisions made by AI systems.

Texas HB 1709, sponsored by Rep. Giovanni Capriglione, R-Keller, was prefiled on December 23 for the upcoming legislative session that is scheduled to begin on January 14. Representative Capriglione is the chair of the House Artificial Intelligence & Emerging Technologies and Pensions, Investments & Financial Services committees. The bill would regulate the use of artificial intelligence (AI) systems by certain business entities and state agencies. It would require developers and deployers of high-risk AI systems to conduct impact assessments, disclose AI interactions to consumers and implement risk management policies. The bill would also establish the Texas Artificial Intelligence Council and the Artificial Intelligence Regulatory Sandbox Program to oversee AI development and ensure ethical use.

STATES THAT HAVE PASSED BILLS INTO LAW:

NOW LAW: Colorado SB205 Colorado Becomes the First State to Enact Comprehensive AI Legislation. The new law becomes effective February 1, 2026. It applies generally to developers and deployers of “high risk AI systems,” which are defined as AI systems that make, or are a substantial factor in making a consequential decision. The law also defines “consequential decision” as “any decision that has a material legal or similarly significant effect on the provision or denial to any consumer of, or the cost or terms of: (a) education enrollment or an education opportunity, (b) employment or an employment opportunity, (c) a financial or lending service, (d) an essential government service, (e) health-care services, (f) housing, (g) insurance, or (h) a legal service.”

The law is aimed at addressing AI bias, establishing a requirement of human oversight throughout the life cycle of AI systems, and requiring significant documentation around the use of AI.

It applies to any person doing business in Colorado who develops an “AI system” or deploys a “high-risk AI system.” In effect, this means that it applies to any organization using a high-risk AI system, whether or not that system is consumer-facing. Importantly, the law explicitly excludes a Private Right of Action, leaving enforcement solely to the Colorado Attorney General.

NOW LAW: California AB 2013/Chapter 817 was signed into law by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom on September 28, 2024 and takes effect on January 1, 2025. This law requires, on or before January 1, 2026, and before each time thereafter, that a generative AI system or service, or a substantial modification to such a system or service, released on or after January 1, 2022, is made available to Californians for use, regardless of whether the terms of that use include compensation, a developer of the system or service to post on the developer’s internet website documentation regarding the data used to train the generative AI system or service. Documentation is required to include a high-level summary of the datasets used in the development of the system or service.

NOW LAW: California SB 896/Chapter 928 was signed into law by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom on September 29, 2024 and takes effect on January 1, 2025. This law will bring the California Privacy Protection Agency into the reporting creation aspect of this bill. The law will create the Artificial Intelligence Accountability Act as a follow up to Sen. Bill Dodd’s, D-Napa, CR 17, as he stated in his press release. Additionally, the law requires state agencies to develop a risk report for potentially the most significant uses of artificial intelligence. It will also require state agencies to alert users when they are interacting with artificial intelligence.

FAILED BILLS:

California SB 1047 was vetoed by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom on September 29, 2024. It was not overridden. This bill would have established safety and security protocols for large developers of advanced AI models that require over $100 million to train or meet a certain computing power threshold. In his veto message, the governor stated that focusing on regulating large artificial intelligence models based on size and cost could create a false sense of security. He expressed concern that the bill’s approach may overlook potential risks from smaller, specialized models and could stifle innovation. 

Charitable Solicitation

PROPOSED LAWS:

Passed Legislation

Nonprofit Governance

NOW LAW: Illinois SB 2930/Public Act 635 was signed by Democratic Gov. J. B. Pritzker on July 1, 2024, and effective as of January 1, 2025. The law will, in part, provide that a nonprofit, within 30 days after filing its annual AG990-IL Charitable Organization Annual Report, that reports grants of $1 million or more to other charitable organizations would need to post on its website, if applicable, the aggregated demographic information of the corporation’s directors and officers, including race, ethnicity, gender, disability status, veteran status, sexual orientation, and gender identity.

N.B. A suit challenging the law’s constitutionality was filed by American Alliance for Equal Rights on January 21, 2025. More information on the suit, as well as a link to the complaint, can be found in the NonProfit Times, here.

Salary Disclosure

Read more about this issue

PROPOSED LAWS:

Alaska HB 156, passed the House Labor & Commerce Committee on May 13 and is pending in the House Finance Committee. The bill would increase employer transparency regarding employee compensation. It would:

• Require employers to include salary or wage ranges in job advertisements.
• Allow employees and job applicants to discuss their own compensation and inquire about others’ compensation without facing employer retaliation.
• Prohibit employers from asking applicants about their previous compensation or prevent employees from assisting others in exercising these rights.
• Require employers to display a summary of these rights in a conspicuous location within the workplace.

California AB 1251 has been scheduled for a hearing in the Senate Labor, Public Employment & Retirement Committee on June 18 at 9:30 AM. The bill would require a private employer who publicly advertises a job posting to include in the posting a statement disclosing whether the posting is for a vacancy for the advertised position or not. The bill would deem violations of the provisions unfair competition. An analysis is available here.

California SB 642 has been scheduled for a hearing in the Assembly Labor & Employment Committee on June 25 at 1:30 PM. The bill would revise the definition of “pay scale” to mean an estimate of an expected wage range that an employer reasonably expects to pay for the position upon hire and is made in good faith. The bill would also prohibit an employer from paying employees at wage rates less than the rates paid to employees of another sex instead of the opposite sex. It would also require a civil action to recover wages to be commenced no later than three years after the last date the cause of action occurs. An analysis is available here.

Connecticut SB 1036, sponsored by Sen. Mae Flexer, was referred to the Joint Labor & Public Employees Committee on January 22. The bill would establish disclosures to ensure pay transparency and eliminate wage disparities. It would require employers to:

• Disclose pay and other information in all job postings and notices, both internal and external.
• Disclose all available job postings to all employees and disclose who was selected for such positions.
• Disclose how to advance through career progressions available to eligible employees.
• Preserve records of job descriptions.

Delaware HB 105, as substituted by HS 2, passed the House on June 10 and is pending in the Senate Labor Committee. The bill would require that employers include salary or wage range information and a general description of benefits in all postings for job opportunities and ensure that applicants have access to that information prior to any offer or discussion of compensation. Employers would be required to maintain records relating to job descriptions and wage rates for current employees and for three years after the departure of an employee.

Maine LD 54/HP 18,  sponsored by Joint Labor Committee Chair Rep. Amy Roeder and introduced January 6, 2025.  Referred to the Joint Labor Committee on January 6.  The bill would require an employer with 10 or more employees:

• To list the pay range for job postings.
• Upon employee request, to disclose the pay range for the employee’s position.
• To maintain a record of each position held by an employee and the employee’s pay history during employment and for three years after.

Maine LD 941 (HB 941) sponsored by Rep. Marshall Archer, D-Saco, was referred to the Joint Labor Committee on March 5. Representative Archer is a member of the committee. The bill would require an employer that employs 10 or more employees to include a wage range in any job posting for a position of employment in the state. An employer acting in good faith could pay an employee a wage different than the wage range based upon factors such as market conditions or the experience or education of the employee.

New York AB 5906 was amended on June 6 and passed the Assembly Codes Committee on June 9; it passed the Rules Committee on June 10 and is pending third reading in the chamber. The bill would require employers to provide disclosures regarding employee compensation and benefits, including any non-salary or non-wage compensation and benefits. Companion bill SB 5990 was amended on the Senate floor on June 6 and is pending third reading in the chamber.

New York SB 5990 is sponsored by Sen. Jessica Ramos, D-Jackson Heights, who is the chair of the Senate Labor Committee, which the bill passed on May 20 and is pending on the 2nd report calendar. The bill would require employers to provide disclosures regarding employee compensation and benefits, including any non-salary or non-wage compensation and benefits. Companion bill AB 5906 was amended on May 13 and recommitted to the Assembly Labor Committee, where it remains pending; it is sponsored by Asm. Alex Bores, D-Upper East Side, who is a member of the committee.

Virginia SB 1132 was vetoed by Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin on March 24; the legislature could override the veto with a two-thirds vote of members present. The bill would have established protections for prospective employees. The bill would have prohibited a prospective employer from:

• Seeking the wage or salary history of a prospective employee.
• Relying on the wage or salary history of a prospective employee in determining the wages or salary the prospective employee is to be paid.
• Relying on the wage or salary history of a prospective employee in considering the prospective employee for employment.
• Refusing to interview, hire, employ or promote an employee or prospective employee or otherwise retaliating against a prospective employee for not providing wage or salary history.
• Failing or refusing to disclose the wage, salary, or wage or salary range in each public and internal posting for each job, promotion, transfer, or other employment opportunity.

The bill would have also established a cause of action for an aggrieved prospective employee or employee.

Washington SB 5408 was signed by Democratic Gov. Bob Ferguson on May 20 and becomes effective on July 26. The law will allow any individual to provide written notice to an employer alleging that the job posting does not comply with disclosure of wage scale or salary range requirements. If an employer corrects the posting within 14 calendar days of receiving the written notice, no penalties, damages or other relief would be assessed.

STATES THAT HAVE PASSED BILLS INTO LAW:

NOW LAW: California SB 1162 /Chapter 559 was signed by Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom on September 27, 2022, and took effect January 1, 2023. The law expands state pay data reporting requirements to cover contracted employees. The law requires a private employer having 100 or more employees to submit a pay data report to the Civil Rights Department. This law revises the timeframe in which a private employer is required to submit this information to require that it’s provisioned on or before the second Wednesday of May. This law requires the pay data report to include the median and mean hourly rate for each combination of race, ethnicity and sex within each job category. It also requires an employer, upon request, to provide an employee with the pay scale for the position in which the employee is currently employed. The law requires an employer with 15 or more employees to include the pay scale for a position in any job posting. The law requires an employer to maintain records of a job title and wage rate history for each employee for a specified timeframe, to be open to inspection by the labor commissioner

NOW LAW: Maryland HB 649/Chapter 271 alters the requirement that an employer disclose wage information to an applicant for employment. An employer will be required to disclose wage information in postings and to employees, as specified. A wage range disclosed by an employer will have to be set in good faith. The law also prohibits an employer from taking retaliatory action against employees and requires keeping a record of compliance for at least three years. The law was signed by Democratic Gov. Wes Moore on April 25, 2024 and took effect on October 1, 2024. 

NOW LAW: Massachusetts HB 4890/Chapter 141 was signed by Democratic Gov. Maura Healey on July 31, 2024 and takes effect October 29, 2025. The law requires:

• Annually, by February 1, a covered employer, subject to EEO-1 data report filing requirements, to submit to the state secretary a copy of its EEO-1 data report for the prior year.
• In each odd-numbered year, not later than February 1, a covered employer, subject to federal EEO-3 data report or EEO-5 data report filing requirements, to submit to the state secretary a copy of its EEO-3 data report or EEO-5 data report, as applicable, covering the most recent filing period.
• In each even-numbered year, not later than February 1, a covered employer, subject to federal EEO-4 data report filing requirements, to submit to the state secretary a copy of its EEO-4 data report covering the most recent filing period.

Employers will also be required to:

• Disclose the pay range for a particular and specific employment position in posting it.
• Provide the pay range for a particular and specific employment position to an employee who is offered a promotion, or transfer, to a new position with different job responsibilities.
• Provide the pay range for a particular and specific employment position to an employee holding such position, or to an applicant for such position, upon request.

NOW LAW: Minnesota SF 3852/Chapter 110 is an omnibus labor policy act. Its provisions include requiring salary ranges be included in job postings. The act was signed into law by Gov. Tim Walz on May 17, 2024, and the relveant provisions are effective as of July 1, 2024, and Janury 1, 2025.

NOW LAW: New York SB 1326/Chapter 94 was signed by Gov. Kathy Hochul on March 3, 2023 and has effect from September 17, 2022 at the same time as SB 9427 from last session. The law specifies that existing laws on salary disclosure exclude remote work opportunities performed entirely out of state.

NOW LAW: Vermont HB 704 requires that job advertisements include the compensation or compensation range and job description for the advertised position. The act also prohibits employers from taking adverse action against current or prospective employees pursuant to the rights provided in the bill. The act was signed into law by Republican Gov. Phil Scott on June 4, 2024 and will take effect on July 1, 2025.