What employers should know about key developments this week:

  • State-Led Artificial Intelligence (AI) Legislation: Illinois recently codified the disparate impact theory of liability (which focuses on effect, not intent), and California has long recognized the theory. Both states’ AI frameworks should be interpreted accordingly. Texas’s Responsible AI Governance Act takes a different approach, requiring evidence of discriminatory intent.
  • Discipline and Termination Oversight: California’s Senate Bill 947, the No Robo Bosses Act, would bar employers from relying solely on automated systems for discipline or termination decisions and would require human review with independent corroboration.
  • Federal Pushback and State Retreat: Colorado twice delayed its original AI Act, then paused enforcement amid a lawsuit joined by the federal government. The state ultimately repealed the original law and replaced it with a narrower version focused on notice and disclosure.

In this episode of Employment Law This Week®, Epstein Becker Green attorneys Eleanor T. Chung and Nathaniel M. Glasser examine how states are regulating AI in the workplace and what employers need to know.

Transcript

[00:00:04] George Whipple: Welcome to Employment Law This Week. I’m George Whipple. States take the lead on AI legislation - Artificial intelligence is rapidly changing the workplace. States and local governments are out in front of this transition, introducing new legislation and updating regulations to stay ahead of the technology. Epstein Becker Green’s Eleanor Chung tells us why it’s no surprise that this action is taking place at the state level.

[00:00:38] Eleanor Chung: Justice Brandeis famously said that the states are laboratories of democracy, and we're definitely seeing that with regard to AI in the states. We see that with the difference in the intent vs. impact tensions in the states. 

[00:00:51] George Whipple: For example, Illinois recently passed a law to codify the disparate impact theory of liability, which focuses on effect not intent, and California has long recognized this theory. Therefore, the AI regulatory frameworks in these states should be interpreted to incorporate this theory. 

[00:01:14] Eleanor Chung: Texas' Responsible AI Governance Act, or TRAIGA, went the opposite way. Disparate impact alone under that legislation doesn't establish a violation. You have to have evidence that the tool was built with discriminatory intent.

[00:01:29] George Whipple: Some of these laboratories are pushing the envelope, taking novel approaches to regulating AI. Epstein Becker Green’s Nathaniel Glasser tells us about legislation that has stood out to him.

[00:01:43] Nathaniel Glasser: One of the more innovative states we've seen is Connecticut, which in May 2026 passed SB 5 or Public Act 26-15. That law regulates the use of automated employment-related decision-making technology. As of October 1st, 2026, any employer that executes a reduction in force qualifying as a mass layoff under the federal WARN Act must provide written notice to the Connecticut Department of Labor disclosing whether the employer's use of AI or other technology was a contributing factor to the reduction in force.

[00:02:18] Eleanor Chung: California's SB 947 targets the back end of employment, not just hiring. Most laws focus on screening and hiring. SB 947, on the other hand, is aimed at discipline and termination. It would bar employers from relying solely on an automated system for disciplinary or termination decisions and require human review with independent corroboration before acting on the output. 

[00:02:42] Nathaniel Glasser: Notwithstanding the focus of many states and localities to regulate the use of artificial intelligence, including in the workplace, we are seeing resistance from the federal government as well as some backpedaling from certain states. For example, in Colorado, its original AI Act was delayed twice, and then it was paused as a result of litigation that was filed by xAI and joined by the Federal Justice Department. Ultimately, Colorado lawmakers repealed the original act and passed a new law that focuses on notice and disclosure.

[00:03:15] George Whipple: This space is moving quickly, and every jurisdiction is handling regulation differently, so it’s important to stay up to date. 

[00:03:25] Nathaniel Glasser: To help our clients keep track of all of these developments, we've created a state AI law tracker that includes an interactive map for ease of use.

[00:03:33] George Whipple: You can find that tracker at ebglaw.com/aimap. Thanks, Nathaniel and Eleanor. And thank you for watching. We’ll see you next time.



Check Out Our State AI Law Tracker

This interactive map provides an overview of the state-level AI landscape, organizing enacted legislation across three policy domains: omnibus consumer and transparency laws, health care and life sciences statutes, and employment and workforce mandates.

Learn More

In Case You Missed It

Adam S. Forman on Navigating Workplace AI and Labor Relations Risk

When it comes to workplace technology and the law, few have seen more than Adam S. Forman. In this one-on-one conversation, Adam explains why the legal questions around workplace technology are older than most employers realize—and why the stakes have never been higher.


Modernizing Compliance: DOL Proposes Safe Harbor for Electronic Group Health Plan Disclosures Under ERISA, Epstein Becker Green Insight

New Massachusetts Employer Notice Obligation, Workforce Bulletin

New York Federal Court Enforces Non-Compete Against Employee Terminated for Cause, Trade Secrets & Employee Mobility

About Employment Law This Week

For employers navigating risk, workforce, and the bottom line. Employment Law This Week® delivers the employment and labor developments that matter—without the noise. Part of the Epstein Becker Green Insights Network.

Your Workforce. Our Business.® 
As a trusted leader in U.S. employment law, Epstein Becker Green supports employers from a variety of industries in mitigating risks, safeguarding reputations, and enhancing bottom lines. Learn more about our employment, labor, and workforce management services.

Email Notifications

Sign Up Here

Follow Us

Never miss an episode! Subscribe to Employment Law This Week on your preferred platform:

Amazon Music      Apple Podcasts      Overcast      Pandora      Spotify      YouTube

Also on Audible |  Deezer |  Goodpods |  iHeartRadio | PlayerFM |  Pocket Casts | YouTube Music

Back to Series
Jump to Page
Advanced Search ›

Privacy Preference Center

When you visit any website, it may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies. This information might be about you, your preferences or your device and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to. The information does not usually directly identify you, but it can give you a more personalized web experience. Because we respect your right to privacy, you can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Click on the different category headings to find out more and change our default settings. However, blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the site and the services we are able to offer.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable information.

Performance Cookies

These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not know when you have visited our site, and will not be able to monitor its performance.