Home › AI Laws › Alabama › Birmingham
AI Laws in Birmingham, Alabama
As of 2026-06-21, AI Laws USA tracks 15 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Birmingham, Alabama: 10+ federal protections, 4 Alabama state-level rules, and 1 local Birmingham ordinance. Coverage is strongest on AI-generated images, automated decision-making, AI disclosure and transparency, and deepfakes. 4 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
Birmingham local AI rules (and Jefferson County)
1 local AI rule specific to Birmingham, Alabama or Jefferson County.
-
In effect Limited protection
Birmingham AL GenAI Policy
Birmingham, AL · Effective 2024-08-01 · City of Birmingham AL, Interim Guidelines For Using Generative Artificial Intelligence (2024)
City of Birmingham AL administrative policy on employee use of generative AI tools with disclosure, prohibited data, and human-review rules.
Alabama-level AI rules
4 Alabama state rules apply to residents and businesses in Birmingham. Sorted strongest first.
-
In effect Limited protection
Alabama Election Deepfake Law
Alabama · Effective 2024-10-01 · 2024 Ala. Acts (HB 172)
Alabama criminalizes distributing materially false AI-generated media intended to harm a candidate or mislead voters within 90 days of an election. First violation is a misdemeanor; repeats within five years are felonies. Clearly disclaimed synthetic media is exempt.
-
In effect Limited protection
Alabama Synthetic Private Images Law
Alabama · Effective 2024-10-01 · 2024 Ala. Acts (HB 161), amending Ala. Code § 13A-6-240
Alabama prohibits the nonconsensual creation or distribution of 'private images,' expressly including AI-altered or synthetically generated depictions of people in nudity or sexual conduct. Both distribution and creation are criminalized.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect) Limited protection
Alabama Personal Data Protection Act (privacy / profiling opt-out)
Alabama · Effective 2027-05-01 · 2026 Ala. Acts (HB 351), Alabama Personal Data Protection Act
Alabama's comprehensive consumer privacy law gives residents the right to tell businesses to stop using their personal data for profiling that drives automated decisions with major consequences. This covers decisions about things like lending and credit, housing, insurance, education, employment, healthcare, criminal justice, and access to basic necessities. Consumers can also opt out of targeted advertising and the sale of their data. The Alabama Attorney General enforces the law, and there is no individual lawsuit right.
-
In effect Limited protection
Alabama Child Protection Act (AI-generated CSAM)
Alabama · Effective 2024-10-01 · Ala. Code Sec. 13A-12-190 et seq.; 2024 Ala. Acts (HB 168)
This law updates Alabama's criminal statutes on child sexual abuse material so that computer-generated and digitally altered images count the same as photographs of real children. It does this by adding 'virtually indistinguishable' depictions to the legal definition of child sexual abuse material, which captures content produced or manipulated by artificial intelligence. Prosecutors no longer have to prove an actual child was depicted when the image is realistic enough to be mistaken for one. The existing felony penalties for possessing or disseminating such material continue to apply.
Federal AI rules that apply in Birmingham, Alabama
These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including Birmingham, Alabama. Showing the 10 strongest and most recent.
-
In effect Stronger protection
Bartz v. Anthropic
N.D. Cal. · Effective 2025-09-05 · Bartz v. Anthropic PBC, No. 3:24-cv-05417 (N.D. Cal.)
Authors Andrea Bartz, Charles Graeber, and Kirk Wallace Johnson sued Anthropic over its use of pirated-book datasets to train Claude. In June 2025 Judge William Alsup ruled that training on lawfully purchased books was fair use. The piracy claims (LibGen ingestion) were not adjudicated to a final ruling — they proceeded toward settlement. In September 2025 Anthropic agreed to a $1.5 billion class settlement, though Judge Alsup denied preliminary approval without prejudice pending additional information on the claims protocol and attorney fees.
-
In effect Stronger protection
Banner v. Tesla (Autopilot)
S.D. Fla. · Effective 2025-08-01 · Benavides v. Tesla, Inc., No. 1:21-cv-21940 (S.D. Fla. Aug. 1, 2025)
A Florida federal jury found Tesla 33% liable in August 2025 for the 2019 death of Naibel Benavides Leon, in a crash involving Autopilot. The verdict awarded $243M (later reduced to ~$220M) — the first Autopilot wrongful-death verdict against Tesla.
-
In effect Stronger protection
COPPA + 2025 Rule (childrens data)
United States · Effective 2025-06-23 · 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501–6506; 16 C.F.R. Part 312
COPPA requires online services aimed at children under 13 to get verifiable parental consent before collecting kids' personal data. The 2025 rule update — fully in effect since April 22, 2026 — adds biometric identifiers (like face templates and voiceprints, which matter for AI tools), requires separate parental consent before sharing children's data for targeted advertising, and tightens data retention limits.
-
In effect Stronger protection
TAKE IT DOWN Act
United States · Effective 2025-05-19 · Pub. L. No. 119-12 (S. 146)
Makes it a federal crime to knowingly publish intimate images of someone without consent, including AI-generated deepfakes. Social media and similar platforms must give victims a way to request removal and must take the content (and known copies) down within 48 hours. The platform removal requirement became enforceable May 19, 2026, and the FTC has already begun enforcement.
-
Blocked / in litigation Stronger protection
NetChoice v. Yost (Ohio)
S.D. Ohio · Effective 2025-04-16 · NetChoice, LLC v. Yost, No. 2:24-cv-00047 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 16, 2025)
Ohio's Social Media Parental Notification Act — requiring parental consent for minors' social-media use, including algorithmic feeds — was preliminarily enjoined on February 12, 2024, then permanently enjoined on April 16, 2025 when the district court granted summary judgment for NetChoice. The state appealed to the Sixth Circuit, which vacated the district court's injunction in 2026.
-
In effect Stronger protection
Thaler v. Perlmutter (Copyright)
D.C. Cir. · Effective 2025-03-18 · Thaler v. Perlmutter, 130 F.4th 1039 (D.C. Cir. 2025)
The companion copyright case: Stephen Thaler sought to register a copyright with 'Creativity Machine' (his AI) as the author. The D.C. Circuit affirmed in March 2025 that the Copyright Act's human-authorship requirement is dispositive as a matter of statutory law. AI cannot be a copyright author under U.S. law.
-
In effect Stronger protection
Thomson Reuters v. Ross
D. Del. · Effective 2025-02-11 · Thomson Reuters Enterprise Centre GmbH v. Ross Intelligence, Inc., 694 F. Supp. 3d 467 (D. Del. 2025)
Thomson Reuters sued legal-research startup Ross Intelligence in 2020 for copying Westlaw headnotes to train a competing AI legal-research tool. In February 2025, Judge Stephanos Bibas (sitting by designation) granted summary judgment to Thomson Reuters on direct copyright infringement and rejected Ross's fair-use defense — the first definitive U.S. ruling on AI-training fair use. The 2023 jury trial verdict had been deadlocked; the 2025 ruling resolved liability.
-
In effect Stronger protection
Louis v. SafeRent
D. Mass. · Effective 2024-11-20 · Louis v. SafeRent Solutions, LLC, No. 1:22-cv-10800 (D. Mass.)
SafeRent agreed in November 2024 to a $2.275M settlement and a five-year ban on using its 'SafeRent Score' for housing-voucher applicants, after a class action alleged its AI tenant-screening tool systematically denied housing to Black and Hispanic Section 8 voucher holders. The first major AI tenant-screening Fair Housing Act settlement.
-
In effect Stronger protection
FTC Impersonation Rule (AI)
United States · Effective 2024-04-01 · 16 C.F.R. Part 461; 89 Fed. Reg. 15017
The FTC's Impersonation Rule lets the agency directly sue scammers who pretend to be a government agency or a real business — including those who use AI-cloned voices or generated images to do so. Civil penalties can reach $53,088 per violation. The FTC also issued a supplemental notice in February 2024 proposing to extend the rule to all individual impersonation.
-
In effect Stronger protection
TCPA (AI voice calls)
United States · Effective 2024-02-08 · 47 U.S.C. § 227; FCC 24-17
Robocalls using AI-cloned or AI-generated voices are treated like other 'artificial voice' calls: callers need your prior express consent, must identify themselves, and must offer opt-outs for telemarketing. You can personally sue violators for $500 to $1,500 per illegal call.
Frequently asked questions about AI laws in Birmingham, Alabama
Are there AI laws in Birmingham, Alabama?
What federal AI rules apply in Birmingham?
Does Alabama have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Alabama?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Birmingham?
How do I report an AI law violation in Birmingham?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Birmingham?
Is Birmingham regulated by Alabama's consumer privacy act?
Have we missed an AI rule in Birmingham?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Birmingham ordinance, county rule, or local enforcement action we should add, email [email protected] or submit a correction. Every entry must include a verifiable source.