Home › AI Laws › Michigan › Hagar Township
AI Laws in Hagar Township, Michigan
As of 2026-07-19, AI Laws USA tracks 20 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Hagar Township, Michigan: 10+ federal protections, 9 Michigan state-level rules, and 1 local Hagar Township ordinance. Coverage is strongest on consumer protection, deepfakes, government use of AI, and automated decision-making. 10 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
Hagar Township local AI rules (and Berrien County)
1 local AI rule specific to Hagar Township, Michigan or Berrien County.
-
In effect Moderate protection
Hagar Township MI data center moratorium (eff. July 13, 2026)
Hagar Township, MI · Effective 2026-07-13 · Hagar Township, MI board action, July 13, 2026, data center moratorium
Hagar Township in Berrien County, Michigan (on Lake Michigan, north of Benton Harbor) adopted a moratorium on data centers on July 13, 2026. How long the pause lasts was not reported.
Michigan-level AI rules most relevant to Hagar Township
9 Michigan state rules apply to residents and businesses in Hagar Township. Showing the 8 most relevant to Hagar Township's local picture; 1 more are on the Michigan jurisdiction page.
-
In effect Limited protection
Michigan Intimate Deep Fakes Act
Michigan · Effective 2025-08-26 · 2025 Mich. Pub. Acts 10–11 (HB 4047–4048)
Michigan makes it a crime to create or distribute AI-generated sexually explicit images of a real, identifiable person without their consent. First offenses carry up to one year in jail and a $3,000 fine; aggravated violations (posting online, extortion, prior conviction) escalate to a felony with up to three years. Victims may also sue for damages, injunctions, and up to $1,000/day for violating a restraining order.
-
In effect Limited protection
MI SAVE Acts (2016 AV package)
Michigan · Effective 2016-12-09 · P.A. 332–335 of 2016
Michigan's 2016 four-bill 'SAVE' package made the state one of the most comprehensive AV jurisdictions: it legalized fully driverless operation, authorized commercial AV networks (ride-hail with self-driving cars), allowed truck platooning, established the American Center for Mobility, and explicitly limited manufacturer liability when third parties convert vehicles to autonomous operation.
-
In effect Limited protection
MI AG AI scam alert
MI · Effective 2024-08-15 · Mich. Comp. Laws § 445.903; MI OAG Press Release (Dec. 11, 2024)
Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel issued an alert warning consumers about AI deepfake video scams, voice clones, and synthetic image fraud — including AI-generated investment ads using fake celebrity endorsements — and pledged enforcement under the Michigan Consumer Protection Act.
-
In effect Limited protection
MI SOS Deepfake Election Policy
MI · Effective 2024-02-13 · Mich. Comp. Laws § 168.932f, enacted by P.A. 265 of 2023
Michigan's Secretary of State adopted a statewide response plan for AI-generated deepfake election content, coordinating with Michigan Cyber Command and Michigan State Police. Local clerks have standardized procedures for documenting and escalating AI deepfake incidents.
-
In effect Moderate protection
MI UIA MIDAS Reform Rules
MI · Effective 2017-12-13 · MCL § 421.62a; 2017 Mich. Pub. Acts 224-228
After Michigan's MIDAS automated fraud-detection system wrongly accused tens of thousands of unemployment claimants of fraud and seized their tax refunds, Michigan adopted statutory and regulatory reforms requiring human review before fraud determinations, restitution for wrongful determinations, and prohibition on fully automated fraud findings.
-
In effect Limited protection
MI DOI AI Bulletin
MI · Effective 2024-08-07 · Michigan DIFS Bulletin 2024-20-INS (2024-08-07)
The MI Department of Insurance adopted the NAIC Model Bulletin on Use of Artificial Intelligence Systems by Insurers. Insurers licensed in MI 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 Stronger protection
Sault Tribe (MI) AI Data Center Moratorium
Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians · Effective 2026-04-07 · Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians Board Resolution (Apr. 7, 2026)
Sault Tribe Board of Directors voted unanimously to halt any AI data center development on tribal lands indefinitely, citing strain on local resources and uncertain economic benefit. Came after dozens of community members spoke at public comment.
-
In effect Limited protection
Michigan Election Deepfake Law
Michigan · Effective 2024-02-13 · 2023 Mich. Pub. Acts 263–266; MCL 169.259
Michigan requires clear AI-disclosure disclaimers on political ads created substantially with AI, and separately bans distributing materially deceptive media to influence an election within 90 days of a vote. Distributing election deepfakes without disclosure is a felony punishable by up to five years.
Federal AI rules that apply in Hagar Township, Michigan
These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including Hagar Township, Michigan. 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 Hagar Township, Michigan
Are there AI laws in Hagar Township, Michigan?
What federal AI rules apply in Hagar Township?
Does Michigan have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Michigan?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Hagar Township?
How do I report an AI law violation in Hagar Township?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Hagar Township?
Is Hagar Township regulated by Michigan's consumer privacy act?
Have we missed an AI rule in Hagar Township?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Hagar Township ordinance, county rule, or local enforcement action we should add, email [email protected] or submit a correction. Every entry must include a verifiable source.