SB26-189 repealed and reenacted the earlier provisions, focusing on automated decision-making technology used to materially influence consequential decisions. Its scope includes defined decisions involving areas such as employment, housing, lending, insurance and healthcare, not simply whether the product uses an LLM.
The official summary identifies developer documentation on intended use, training-data categories, limitations and human review, plus update notifications and records. It also describes deployer notices, correction and meaningful human-review rights. Read the enacted summary and signed-act links rather than relying on an older article about the original February/June 2026 deadlines.
Practical example: extracting an address for review and scoring a person for eligibility are different uses. Ask whether the extracted output materially influences the covered decision, who makes that decision and whether human review is meaningful. Do not assume an “assistive” label settles the question.
The Attorney General’s page records an October 2026 interim draft and a hearing on the research date. A same-day status check cannot establish the final hearing outcome. Assign someone to refresh the rule text before award or launch.