AAI Compliance Atlas
FrameworksState lawsIndustriesToolsNews
GuidesMap my obligations →
AAI Compliance Atlas

Structured, continuously verified reference for US AI compliance — federal frameworks, state laws, and the obligations that connect them.

Atlas

  • Frameworks
  • State laws
  • Industries
  • By role
  • Comparisons

Tools

  • Compliance Checker
  • Penalty Calculator
  • Impact Assessment
  • Vendor Questionnaire

Resources

  • Guides
  • News
  • Blog
  • Methodology

Company

  • About
  • Contact
  • Privacy
  • Terms
© 2026 AI Compliance Atlas. Informational only — not legal advice. Consult qualified counsel before making compliance decisions.Verified Sep 11, 2026
Updated daily · Cited primary sources only

The structured reference for US AI compliance.

NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, and every consequential US state AI law in one continuously verified atlas — paired with interactive tools that map obligations to your operations.

Map my obligations →Browse the atlas

Built for compliance officerslegal counselAI product teams

Atlas snapshotv.2026.08.13

US state AI law status — at a glance

ME
WA
VT
NH
OR
ID
MT
ND
MN
WI
MI
NY
MA
CA
NV
WY
SD
IA
IL
IN
OH
PA
NJ
CT
UT
CO
NE
MO
KY
WV
VA
MD
DE
RI
AZ
NM
KS
AR
TN
NC
SC
DC
OK
LA
MS
AL
GA
AK
TX
FL
HI
In effectEffective soonEnacted, pendingActive monitoring
12 laws
Tracked across jurisdictions
2 frameworks
NIST AI RMF · ISO/IEC 42001
48 obligations
Mapped to primary sources
Aug 13
Last verified by monitor
Currently in effect

What's enforceable right now

Snapshot from the freshness monitor. Click any law for full obligations, penalties, and citations.

View full atlas →
JurisdictionLawStatusEffectiveMax penaltyVerified
ColoradoColorado Artificial Intelligence ActC.R.S. § 6-1-1701 to § 6-1-1709StatusEffective soonEffective dateJanuary 1, 2027Max penalty$20KLast verifiedJuly 31, 2026
CaliforniaCalifornia AI Transparency ActCal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 22757 et seq.StatusIn effectEffective dateAugust 2, 2026Max penalty$5KLast verifiedAugust 13, 2026
ConnecticutConnecticut Public Act 26-15 / SB 5 (Online Safety and AI Provisions)Public Act 26-15, 2026 Gen. Assemb. (Substitute S.B. 5, "An Act Concerning Online Safety"), as affected by Public Act 26-100StatusIn effectEffective dateMay 27, 2026Max penaltyNot specifiedLast verifiedAugust 10, 2026
CaliforniaCalifornia Generative AI: Training Data TransparencyCal. Civ. Code §§ 3110–3111StatusIn effectEffective dateJanuary 1, 2026Max penaltyNot specifiedLast verifiedJuly 27, 2026
IllinoisIllinois HB 3773 (AI in Employment Decisions)775 ILCS 5/2-102 (as amended)StatusIn effectEffective dateJanuary 1, 2026Max penaltyNot specifiedLast verifiedAugust 8, 2026
TexasTexas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TRAIGA)Tex. Bus. & Com. Code Chs. 551-554StatusIn effectEffective dateJanuary 1, 2026Max penalty$200KLast verifiedAugust 8, 2026
CaliforniaTransparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act (TFAIA)Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code §§ 22757.10–22757.16; Cal. Lab. Code §§ 1107–1107.2; Cal. Gov. Code § 11546.8 (Stats. 2025, Ch. 138)StatusIn effectEffective dateJanuary 1, 2026Max penalty$1.0MLast verifiedJuly 27, 2026
UtahUtah Artificial Intelligence Policy ActUtah Code Title 13, Chapters 77, 72, and 72aStatusIn effectEffective dateMay 7, 2025Max penalty$5KLast verifiedJuly 27, 2026

For the complete source-linked calendar, watchlist, and law-by-law classification, read the 2026 US state AI laws overview.

Interactive

Tools that turn law into action

Built on the same primary-source data that powers the atlas. Free, no account required.

All tools →
10-question diagnostic

Compliance Checker

Surface every framework and state law that applies to your AI deployments — including likely effective dates.

Question 4 of 10Does the AI system make consequential decisions about a person's employment, credit, housing, or insurance?
  • Yes — directly affects outcomes
  • Yes — but a human reviews each decision
  • No — informational only
Open tool →
Maximum theoretical exposure

Penalty Calculator

Estimate worst-case civil penalties across applicable jurisdictions. Conservative methodology, fully cited.

Colorado AI Act (per violation)$20,000
NYC LL 144 (per day, per tool)$1,500
Texas TRAIGA$200,000
Cure period adjustment−$45,000
Estimated max$612,500
Open tool →
Jurisdiction-tailored template

Impact Assessment Generator

Produces a downloadable impact assessment template aligned with your jurisdiction's statutory requirements.

Open tool →
Find your starting point

Four ways into the atlas

Same primary sources, different lenses. Pick the one that matches how you're scoping work this quarter.

By framework

Maturity & control programs you may already use.

NIST AI RMFNIST GenAI profileISO/IEC 42001

By industry

Where AI use intersects existing sectoral law.

HealthcareCalifornia AI Transparency Act: healthcareFinancial servicesUtah AI Policy Act: financial servicesHR & hiringFlorida AI laws: hiring & HRInsuranceEducation

By role

Obligations differ for builders, buyers, and resellers.

AI developerAI deployerDeveloper + deployerVendor / integrator

By comparison

Side-by-side views for overlapping AI laws and frameworks.

Colorado vs TexasNIST vs ISO 42001NYC LL 144 vs Illinois
Cornerstone references

Pillar guides

Long-form explainers behind the atlas — role obligations, high-risk classification, federal preemption, sectoral overlays, and framework mapping.

All guides →
  • US State AI Laws: All 13 Tracked (2026 Overview)

    2026 guide to US state AI regulation, refreshed for Colorado SB 26-189, Connecticut PA 26-15/26-100, California AI laws, and compliance strategy.

  • AI Deployer vs Developer Obligations — Role Framework

    How US AI laws split obligations between developers and deployers, why the line matters, and how to map your operations to the right role.

  • High-Risk AI System Explained

    High-risk AI defined under Colorado's AI Act (SB 24-205, now reenacted as the SB 26-189 ADMT regime) and parallel concepts in the EU AI Act, NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, and other US state laws.

  • Federal vs State AI Law: Preemption & How They Interact

    How federal AI frameworks, federal enforcement, White House preemption policy, and state AI laws interact in 2026 — with a compliance evidence matrix.

  • AI Impact Assessment Template (2026): NIST, ISO 42001, Colorado ADMT

    Build an AI impact assessment evidence file mapped to NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, Colorado SB 26-189 ADMT evidence, and state-law review workflows.

  • EU AI Act Compliance vs US State AI Laws — 2026 Comparison

    EU AI Act compliance timeline for 2026-2028 compared with US state AI laws including Colorado, Texas, NYC LL 144, California, and Connecticut.

  • NIST AI RMF Playbook: Downloads, Actions & State-Law Map

    NIST ships the AI RMF Playbook as PDF, Excel, CSV and JSON, updated twice a year. What its four functions cover, and how the actions map to US state AI laws.

  • HIPAA Compliance for AI in Healthcare (2026 Guide)

    How HIPAA applies to healthcare AI: PHI use, business associate agreements, de-identification, Security Rule safeguards, breach response, and FDA overlap.

  • AI Compliance Framework: Regulatory Control Map (2026 Guide)

    A 2026 AI compliance framework for mapping NIST AI RMF, ISO/IEC 42001, state AI laws, evidence artifacts, and AI regulatory compliance tooling.

  • AI Governance: Building an AI Compliance Program (2026 Guide)

    How to build an AI governance program: operating model, decision rights, lifecycle gates, the NIST AI RMF GOVERN function, ISO/IEC 42001, and the US state-law overlay.

Freshness monitor

Recent updates

Every entry links to the primary source. We re-verify continuously and timestamp every page.

All updates →
  • August 2, 2026EffectiveCalifornia AI Transparency Act Becomes Operative After a Seven-Month DelayBusiness and Professions Code Chapter 25, the California AI Transparency Act, became operative on August 2, 2026 under Section 22757.6. The date is not the one SB 942 set: as enacted in 2024 the bill provided that "this chapter shall become operative on January 1, 2026," and AB 853 (Stats. 2025, Ch. 674) amended Section 22757.6 before that date arrived, moving the chapter-wide operative date to August 2, 2026. Covered providers with generative-AI systems exceeding 1,000,000 monthly visitors or users that are publicly accessible in California must now make a free AI detection tool available under Section 22757.2 and include manifest and latent disclosures in AI-generated image, video, and audio content under Section 22757.3, subject to a $5,000 civil penalty per violation under Section 22757.4 with each day treated as a discrete violation. Three duties AB 853 added start later: large online platform and GenAI system hosting platform duties on January 1, 2027 under Sections 22757.3.1 and 22757.3.2, and capture device manufacturer duties on January 1, 2028 under Section 22757.3.3. Codified chapter text and SB 942 bill text retrieved 2026-08-13.→
  • July 13, 2026GuidanceColorado Attorney General Closes ADMT Pre-Rulemaking Comment PeriodThe Colorado Attorney General's Office closed its pre-rulemaking comment period for the Automated Decision-Making Technology Act on July 13, 2026. Per coag.gov, the office collected informal public feedback through a comment form and published a considerations paper to guide that input ahead of formal rulemaking. SB 26-189 requires the Attorney General to adopt rules before January 1, 2027 clarifying the requirements for post-adverse-outcome notices and the definition of "materially influence," including presumptions and illustrative examples. As of August 9, 2026 the office had not published proposed rules or announced hearing dates, stating it will update its rulemaking page once the formal process begins. Source retrieved 2026-08-09.→
  • July 6, 2026EnactmentIllinois Enacts SB 315, the Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures ActIllinois Governor JB Pritzker signed Senate Bill 315, the Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act, on July 6, 2026. Per the Office of the Governor, the Act reaches developers of the largest advanced AI systems and requires them to publicly disclose safety practices, report significant safety incidents, maintain compliance processes, and undergo regular independent third-party safety audits — described by the state as the first such third-party audit mandate in the nation. The Act also establishes confidential reporting channels and whistleblower protections for employees who raise AI safety concerns, and takes effect January 1, 2027. SB 315 is a separate statute from Illinois HB 3773, the employment-discrimination amendment to the Illinois Human Rights Act that took effect January 1, 2026. Source retrieved 2026-08-09; the enacted text on ilga.gov was unreachable at retrieval, so covered-developer thresholds and penalty provisions are cited here only to the extent the Governor's announcement states them.→
  • July 1, 2026GuidanceWashington State AI Task Force Releases Final ReportThe Washington Attorney General's Office released the third and final report required by ESSB 5838 on July 1, 2026. Across its preliminary, interim, and final reports, the Task Force advanced 11 policy recommendations. The Attorney General's release says lawmakers introduced legislation addressing eight recommendations during the 2025-2026 biennium and enacted four in whole or in part. The report is a recommendation document and does not itself create private-sector AI compliance duties.→
  • June 2, 2026DelayIllinois IDHR Temporarily Postpones AI Employment Notice RulemakingThe Illinois Department of Human Rights announced on June 2, 2026 that the June 10 public hearing for proposed administrative rules implementing the Artificial Intelligence in Employment provisions of the Illinois Human Rights Act was temporarily postponed. IDHR said it is reviewing matters related to the proposed rulemaking and will provide updated next steps. The underlying Public Act 103-0804 requirements remain effective January 1, 2026; the detailed notice timing, means, and conditions rules remain pending.→

The compliance digest, weekly.

New laws, rulemaking, enforcement actions, and framework updates — distilled to a 4-minute read every Tuesday.

Free · Unsubscribe anytime · No tracking pixels

Joined by compliance & legal leaders across the US.