California’s 2025 Legislative Session: Regulation of Technology and AI
During the 2025 California legislative session, lawmakers have significantly intensified their regulatory efforts in the technology sector. With a particular focus on artificial intelligence (AI), child safety, and data privacy, the session has been marked by proactive engagement from the Computer & Communications Industry Association (CCIA), which is advocating for legislation that promotes innovation while ensuring consumer safety.
Artificial Intelligence and Automated Decision-Making
One of the most pressing themes this session has been the oversight of automated decision systems (ADS). These systems leverage AI to make consequential decisions, particularly in the realm of employment. The California Civil Rights Council has finalized regulations set to take effect on October 1, 2025. These new rules prohibit discriminatory practices stemming from ADS and impose record-keeping and bias audit requirements on employers. The broad definition of “automated decision systems” could affect a wide array of computational processes, from screening resumes to evaluating performance.
As part of their advocacy, the CCIA has commented on the proposed regulations, emphasizing the need for a balanced approach that considers both safety and innovation.
Legislative efforts include AB 1018, which sought to impose compliance requirements on developers and deployers of high-risk AI systems. Mandating impact assessments and risk governance programs, this bill aimed to hold businesses and government accountable. However, it failed to progress before the legislative adjournment and will be carried over to the 2026 session.
SB 7, nicknamed the “No Robo Bosses Act,” mandates employers to notify affected workers when an ADS is in use. This bill aims to limit ADS applications to certain purposes, but its broad language could hinder smaller businesses. While larger firms may adapt fairly easily, smaller companies could struggle to maintain competitiveness in a rapidly evolving digital landscape.
Another notable piece of legislation, SB 53, arises after Governor Gavin Newsom’s veto of SB 1047 due to concerns about vague language. This bill focuses on AI frontier models posing a “credible risk” and introduces transparency requirements and whistleblower protections. Similar to SB 7, it emphasizes larger developers while overlooking the fact that smaller companies can also create significant safety risks.
Unfortunately, two proposed bills, SB 259 and SB 295, which addressed algorithmic pricing, failed to secure passage and will continue to the next year’s session after not adequately addressing stakeholder concerns.
Privacy and Data Brokers
California’s existing privacy framework, primarily defined by the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA), is undergoing further refinement. A pivotal bill, SB 361, aims to tighten data broker registration protocols by demanding more transparency. It would require brokers to disclose the types of data collected and whether they’ve shared personal info with law enforcement or AI developers. This bill has successfully passed the legislature and is awaiting the Governor’s signature.
The CCPA’s rulemaking process continues as the California Privacy Protection Agency (CPPA) drafts new regulations. However, the CCIA has voiced concerns about some draft rules that might introduce confusion and unnecessary burdens. Advocating for clarity, the CCIA urges policies that protect consumer privacy without stifling innovation.
Social Media and Online Safety
The topic of social media and its impact on mental health has sparked significant debate. AB 56, which requires social media platforms to display a “black box warning” regarding mental health risks, is under consideration. This legislation applies across the board, impacting all users regardless of age or content. The consequences could extend beyond informing users, potentially limiting those accessing educational or supportive content.
Furthermore, AB 410 aimed to mandate that chatbots disclose their non-human status when requested. However, this proposal did not progress before vital deadlines and will also be revisited in 2026.
A perplexing proposal, AB 1064, seeks to prohibit the development and use of AI systems targeting children. Critics argue that such restrictions could hinder the ability of local companies to innovate and compete effectively in this sector. Conversely, SB 243 proposes standards for chatbot services to foster safer environments for children, avoiding overbroad bans.
Both AB 1064 and SB 243 underscore the delicate balance lawmakers must strike between regulating technology for safety and enabling its continued growth and access.
Navigating the Regulatory Landscape
Throughout the 2025 session, California lawmakers positioned themselves as leaders in technology regulation, emphasizing the importance of AI, consumer privacy, and online safety. The complexity of these emerging regulations points to a broader landscape in which the tension between innovation and safety continues to unfold. For the CCIA, the session entailed a multifaceted strategy of lobbying, regulatory engagement, and public commentary to ensure that consumer protections do not come at the expense of technological advancement.
The ongoing legislative landscape serves as a reminder that discussions surrounding the implications of technology on society are ongoing, complex, and fraught with competing interests.