Home › AI Laws › Iowa › Cedar Rapids
AI Laws in Cedar Rapids, Iowa
As of 2026-07-26, AI Laws USA tracks 20 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Cedar Rapids, Iowa: 10+ federal protections, 8 Iowa state-level rules, and 2 local Cedar Rapids/county ordinances. Coverage is strongest on government use of AI, automated decision-making, consumer protection, and consumer data privacy. 8 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
Cedar Rapids local AI rules (and Linn County)
2 local AI rules specific to Cedar Rapids, Iowa or Linn County.
-
In effect Moderate protection
Linn County IA Data Center Ordinance for Unincorporated Areas
Linn County, IA · Effective 2026-02-18 · Linn County BOS data center ordinance (3rd consideration approved 2026-02-18) (2026-02-18)
Strict zoning: 1,000-ft residential setbacks; mandatory water study and binding Water Use Agreement; noise/light limits; road/infrastructure compensation; community betterment contribution.
-
In effect Moderate protection
Linn County IA 18-month data-center moratorium (2026)
Linn County, Iowa · Effective 2026-07-01 · Linn County (IA) Board of Supervisors Resolution — 18-month EU-3 data-center rezoning moratorium (July 1, 2026)
Linn County, Iowa (home to Cedar Rapids) voted 2-1 on July 1, 2026 to impose an 18-month moratorium pausing all new EU-3 Large-Scale Data Center Zoning District rezoning applications in unincorporated areas of the county. The moratorium is effective immediately through January 1, 2028, and gives the county time to conduct a comprehensive planning process to address data center siting, water use, energy consumption, and community impact. Note: this is a separate and additional measure from the existing Linn County data-center zoning ordinance (February 2026), which established the EU-3 zone; this moratorium pauses NEW rezoning requests under that zone.
Iowa-level AI rules
8 Iowa state rules apply to residents and businesses in Cedar Rapids. Sorted strongest first.
-
In effect Limited protection
Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy (ENTERPRISE P
Iowa · Effective 2025-03-31 · Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) Policy (ENTERPRISE PY-AI)
Iowa's enterprise generative-AI policy, issued under Iowa Administrative Code 129-8.4(8B), sets minimum requirements and prohibited uses for generative AI, mandating human review of AI outputs and disclosure of AI-generated code.
-
In effect Limited protection
Attorney General Brenna Bird Warns of Deepfake Dangers as St
Iowa · Effective 2025-08-19 · Attorney General Brenna Bird Warns of Deepfake Dangers as Students Head Back to School
The Iowa Attorney General issued a consumer alert warning parents and schools that AI-generated deepfake images used to harass or bully students are criminal acts under state and federal law.
-
In effect Limited protection
IA DOI AI Bulletin
IA · Effective 2024-11-07 · Iowa Insurance Division Bulletin 24-04 (2024-11-07)
The IA Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in IA must maintain a written AI program with governance, risk-management, testing, third-party-AI oversight, and documentation controls. The bulletin operationalizes existing unfair-trade-practice and unfair-discrimination law as applied to insurers' AI use cases — underwriting, pricing, claims, fraud detection, and marketing.
-
In effect Limited protection
Iowa Consumer Data Protection Act
Iowa · Effective 2025-01-01 · Iowa SF 262 (2023), Iowa Code ch. 715D
Iowa's privacy law gives consumers rights to access, delete, copy, and opt out of the sale of their personal data and targeted advertising. Notably it does NOT include a profiling opt-out, making it one of the more business-friendly state privacy laws.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect) Moderate protection
Iowa HF 2635 (no AI-only prior-auth denials)
Iowa · Effective 2027-01-01 · Iowa H.F. 2635, 91st Gen. Assemb. (2026), Sec. 514F.8(2A), eff. Jan. 1, 2027
Iowa lets a utilization review organization use an AI-based algorithm or system to conduct an initial review of a prior-authorization request, but forbids relying on AI as the sole basis to deny, delay, or downgrade a medical-necessity prior-authorization request. A qualified human reviewer — a clinical peer or qualified reviewer — must make the binding determination.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect) Limited protection
Iowa SF 2417 (Conversational AI Safety Act)
Iowa · Effective 2027-07-01 · Iowa S.F. 2417, 91st Gen. Assemb. (2026), applies July 1, 2027
Iowa requires operators of conversational AI services to clearly disclose that a user is interacting with artificial intelligence — through a persistent disclaimer or a notice repeated at least every three hours of continuous use — whenever a reasonable person might otherwise believe they are talking to a human. Operators must adopt protocols to respond to user messages about suicidal ideation or self-harm, including referring the user to crisis resources, and may not represent that the service provides professional psychological or behavioral health care, with extra safeguards for minors.
-
In effect Limited protection
Iowa Synthetic Intimate Content Law
Iowa · Effective 2024-07-01 · Iowa HF 2240 (2024)
Iowa criminalizes generating or distributing synthetic images or videos depicting a person in sexual acts or nudity without consent. Violations involving adults are aggravated misdemeanors; involving minors, felonies. Expressly motivated by AI-generated pornographic deepfakes.
-
In effect Limited protection
Iowa AI CSAM Law
Iowa · Effective 2024-07-01 · Iowa SF 2243 (2024), amending Iowa Code § 728
Iowa amended its sexual-exploitation-of-a-minor law to explicitly include depictions 'created, adapted, or modified' by AI to appear to show an identifiable minor in a prohibited act. First offense: Class D felony (up to 5 years); second: Class C felony (up to 10 years). Passed unanimously.
Federal AI rules that apply in Cedar Rapids, Iowa
These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including Cedar Rapids, Iowa. 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
Benavides 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 jury awarded $243M ($129M compensatory + $200M punitive); in February 2026 the court denied Tesla's post-trial motions and upheld the verdict in full — 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., No. 1:20-cv-00613 (D. Del. Feb. 11, 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. No jury trial occurred: a 2023 opinion had denied summary judgment and pointed toward trial, but the court invited renewed briefing and reversed course in the 2025 ruling.
-
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 Cedar Rapids, Iowa
Are there AI laws in Cedar Rapids, Iowa?
What federal AI rules apply in Cedar Rapids?
Does Iowa have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Iowa?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Cedar Rapids?
How do I report an AI law violation in Cedar Rapids?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Cedar Rapids?
Is Cedar Rapids regulated by Iowa's consumer privacy act?
Have we missed an AI rule in Cedar Rapids?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Cedar Rapids ordinance, county rule, or local enforcement action we should add, email [email protected] or submit a correction. Every entry must include a verifiable source.