California Legislature Passes AI, Age-Verification Bills on Session's Last Day

SB-7, sponsored by Sen. Jerry McNerney (D), regulates employers’ use of automated decision systems (ADS) so that AI can assist humans make decisions, but isn't used without human input. Additionally, the legislation prohibits automated decision-making technology from collecting sensitive personal information such as immigration status, religious and political beliefs or health data (see 2505220051).

Under the bill, however, workers lack the right to appeal automated decisions (see 2509030010). But they can request information. For example, an employee can request a copy of the previous 12 months of their data that was used to arrive at a decision (see 2509080005). The legislation passed on a 28-9 vote.

McNerney celebrated the passage in a release Friday. “Businesses are increasingly using AI to boost efficiency and productivity in the workplace,” he said. “But there are currently no safeguards to prevent machines from unjustly or illegally impacting workers’ livelihoods.”

SB-7 “establishes commonsense guardrails to ensure that California workers cannot be fired or disciplined by robo bosses with no human oversight."

Lorena Gonzalez, president of the California Federation of Labor Unions, AFL-CIO, also praised SB-7 because it blocks "robo-bosses" from treating workers like "collateral damage of new technologies in the workplace." The California Federation of Labor Unions, an affiliate of the AFL-CIO, supported the bill.

The state senate concurred on amendments from the assembly concerning another AI-related bill, SB-53, with a 29-8 vote on Friday. The Assembly Privacy Committee voted 12-1 to clear the bill on Thursday (see 2509110066).

SB-53, by Sen. Scott Wiener (D), requires transparency about safety and security protocols and provides whistleblower protection to employees at AI developers (see 2509090038). It is a scaled-back version of similar legislation that Newsom vetoed last year (see 2508150016).

The Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) was unhappy with passage of the bill. "SB 53 inappropriately focuses on large developers without considering that small companies can create powerful models that pose safety risks," a Monday release said. "The bill does not recognize that multiple actors, including downstream deployers, can modify models in a way that could potentially increase safety concerns."

The age-verification signals bill, AB-1043, requires manufacturers to develop a method for device owners to enter the device-user's birthdate or age. This allows a digital signal about the user’s age -- shared as an age bracket -- to be sent to app developers (see 2509080005). The brackets are broken up into users who are younger than 13, those between 13-16, those between 16-18 and users older than 18.

Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D) sponsored the bill, also called the Digital Age Assurance Act. It's aimed at making the digital world safer for children, and also has requirements for developers with actual knowledge that a user is a child to provide tools to the user’s parents for appropriate risk mitigation (see 2503310052).

“Parents shouldn’t have to choose between letting their kids participate in the digital world and keeping them safe,” said Wicks in a press release Sept. 9. “AB 1043 ensures we finally have a consistent, privacy-first way to verify age online -- giving families the confidence that tech platforms can build the right protections for kids into their products.”

The legislature rejected another automated decision systems bill. AB-1018, sponsored by Assembly Privacy Committee Chair Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D), would have created rules for developers and deployers of automated decision systems (see 2506030029).

But more than 20 state and national associations for tech and other industries slammed the algorithmic-discrimination measure in a joint letter to the Senate Appropriations Committee in August, saying it would raise costs for businesses (see 2508190029).

The Fair Online Pricing Act, SB-259, also failed. The bill would have restricted data from a consumer’s device -- including its current location -- from being used to set prices (see 2509100007). The surveillance-pricing bill had drawn scrutiny from Republicans and business groups, who believe the market will resolve issues around surveillance pricing (see 2507150066).

On Thursday, the legislature passed a universal opt-out bill, as well as a proposal on social media account cancellations and a measure adding requirements for data brokers (see 2509110066). Two bills about AI chatbots were also passed Friday before our deadline (see 2509120037).