AI Policy Tracker
Federal and state AI bills and executive actions — each sourced, status-dated, and summarized in plain English. Filter by jurisdiction, status, or impact area, or search by keyword.
Where we’re tracking AI legislation
Showing Hawaii
- Has published items28 jurisdictions
- Tracked, in review20 jurisdictions
- Nothing tracked yet3 jurisdictions
Shading shows whether the tracker has published items for a jurisdiction — not how much AI activity happens there, and not a rating of the state.
Small jurisdictions
Hard to hit on the map — use these. Jurisdictions with no note have no AI bills in the tracker yet.
All jurisdictions A–Z
Jurisdictions with no note have no AI bills in the tracker yet.
- Alabama1 published
- Alaska3 in review
- Arizona1 published
- Arkansas
- California6 published
- Colorado2 published
- Connecticut1 published
- Delaware4 in review
- District of Columbia3 in review
- Florida12 in review
- Georgia1 published
- Hawaii2 published
- Idaho1 published
- Illinois1 published
- Indiana4 in review
- Iowa18 in review
- Kansas1 published
- Kentucky1 published
- Louisiana1 published
- Maine1 published
- Maryland2 published
- Massachusetts34 in review
- Michigan8 in review
- Minnesota41 in review
- Mississippi1 published
- Missouri15 in review
- Montana
- Nebraska1 published
- Nevada
- New Hampshire4 in review
- New Jersey2 published
- New Mexico5 in review
- New York1 published
- North Carolina17 in review
- North Dakota1 published
- Ohio13 in review
- Oklahoma17 in review
- Oregon1 published
- Pennsylvania26 in review
- Rhode Island1 published
- South Carolina1 published
- South Dakota3 in review
- Tennessee1 published
- Texas1 published
- Utah1 published
- Vermont13 in review
- Virginia1 published
- Washington2 published
- West Virginia5 in review
- Wisconsin11 in review
- Wyoming1 published
Showing Hawaii · 2 matches
Clear filtersHIEnacted
Relating To Artificial Intelligence.
Enacted · status as of 2026-07-14
Hawaii H.B. 2137 (H.D. 3 / S.D. 2 / C.D. 1), introduced in the Thirty-Third Legislature (2026), creates a new chapter of the Hawaii Revised Statutes governing AI-generated realistic digital imitations of individuals. Section 1 finds that deepfake technology enables harmful identity imitation—including fraud, election interference, and non-consensual pornography—and that expert detection rates are as low as 62 percent. The bill's stated purpose is to prohibit certain harmful uses of AI-generated personal likenesses and to provide civil remedies. Section 2 (§-2) makes it unlawful to knowingly publish a realistic digital imitation of an identifiable individual without consent if it is used in an advertisement, causes harm, or is used to commit fraud, defamation, harassment, or other criminal acts. Section 3 (§-3) exempts parody, satire, commentary, criticism, scholarship, political or educational expression, news reporting, documentary or biographical representations (with some fictionalization), and advertisements for such exempt works. Section 4 (§-4) establishes civil remedies, allowing injured individuals or their estates—for up to ten years after the individual's death—to seek injunctive relief (including removal orders), monetary damages up to $25,000 per advertisement or actual damages for reputational injury and emotional distress, punitive damages where malice is proven, and reasonable attorneys' fees and court costs. The Attorney General may also bring equitable actions where widespread public harm is involved. Section 5 (§-5) limits liability of passive media platforms disseminating third-party content and preserves existing Section 230 protections. The Act takes effect upon approval.
- Enterprise
- Quality assurance
- AI policy
HIEnacted
Relating To Artificial Intelligence.
Enacted · status as of 2026-07-14
Hawaii S.B. 3001 (S.D. 2 / H.D. 3 / C.D. 1), the 'Artificial Intelligence Disclosure and Safety Act,' amends Chapter 481B of the Hawaii Revised Statutes by adding a new section governing AI companion systems. Under Section 3, operators of AI companions must issue clear, conspicuous disclosures whenever a reasonable person might believe they are interacting with a human. When an operator knows or has reasonable certainty a user is a minor, enhanced disclosures are required—either as a persistent visible disclaimer or at session start and at least once per hour during continuous interactions. Operators must adopt crisis-intervention protocols that refer users expressing suicidal ideation or self-harm to services such as suicide hotlines or crisis text lines, use evidence-based risk measurement methods, and refrain from representing the AI companion as a professional mental health provider. Additional protections for known minor users include prohibitions on unpredictable reward systems designed to increase engagement, outputs discouraging disengagement, and sexually explicit or objectifying content, as well as a requirement to provide screen-time management tools for users, parents, and guardians. Beginning January 1, 2028, operators must submit annual reports to the Behavioral Health Administration of the Department of Health detailing the number of crisis referrals issued, protocols for detecting self-harm prompts, and protocols prohibiting AI responses promoting self-harm or suicide—without including any personal user information. Violations constitute unfair or deceptive acts or practices under Section 480-2, but the bill does not create a private right of action. Liability does not extend to third-party AI model developers for violations committed by operators using their models. The Act takes effect upon approval.
- Enterprise
- Quality assurance
- AI policy