Home › AI Laws › Missouri › St. Louis
AI Laws in St. Louis, Missouri
As of 2026-06-17, AI Laws USA tracks 14 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in St. Louis, Missouri: 10+ federal protections, 3 Missouri state-level rules, and 1 local St. Louis ordinance. Coverage is strongest on children's online safety, AI-generated images, non-consensual intimate imagery, and deepfakes. 2 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
St. Louis local AI rules (and St. Louis (city) County)
1 local AI rule specific to St. Louis, Missouri or St. Louis (city) County.
-
In effect Moderate protection
St. Louis Surveillance Technology CCOPS Ordinance
St. Louis, MO · Effective 2022-04-29 · Ord. 71842 (BB 185) (2022-04-29)
24th U.S. CCOPS law; requires Board of Aldermen approval and impact reports for any city surveillance technology including face-recognition, ALPRs, predictive policing.
Missouri-level AI rules
3 Missouri state rules apply to residents and businesses in St. Louis. Sorted strongest first.
-
Proposed / pending Proposed or pending
Missouri Deepfake & Digital Media Protection Act
Missouri · HB 1887, 103rd General Assembly, 2nd Regular Session (2026)
Would make it a felony to share or threaten to share AI-generated or digitally altered intimate depictions of a person without consent, with up to four years imprisonment for a first offense and up to ten years if the depicted person is a minor. Online platforms would be required to establish takedown mechanisms for nonconsensual intimate deepfakes by end of 2026. Social media age-verification and parental-consent requirements for minors under 16 are also included.
-
Expired Unknown
Missouri Taylor Swift Act (SB 1117)
Missouri · SB 1117, 103rd General Assembly, 2nd Regular Session (2026)
Would establish civil and criminal liability for creating or sharing nonconsensual intimate digital depictions, including AI-generated deepfakes. Known informally as the 'Taylor Swift Act' following the 2024 viral spread of AI-generated intimate images of the artist. Felony charges apply for first offenses, with enhanced penalties when the depicted person is a minor.
-
In effect Limited protection
Missouri RSMo 573.010 (computer-generated CSAM)
Missouri · Effective 2006-06-05 · RSMo 573.010 (computer-generated image language added 2006 H.B. 1698)
Missouri's definition of child pornography reaches computer and computer-generated images, not just photographs. It covers a digital or computer-generated image that depicts an actual minor in sexually explicit conduct, as well as an image that is indistinguishable from such a depiction. 'Indistinguishable' means an ordinary person viewing it would conclude it shows an actual minor, so synthetic imagery falls within the definition.
Federal AI rules that apply in St. Louis, Missouri
These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including St. Louis, Missouri. 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 issued a split ruling: training on lawfully purchased books was fair use, but ingesting pirated copies from LibGen was not. In September 2025 Anthropic agreed to a $1.5 billion class settlement — the largest AI copyright recovery to date.
-
In effect Stronger protection
Banner v. Tesla (Autopilot)
S.D. Fla. · Effective 2025-08-01 · Banner 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.
-
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 constitutional and dispositive. 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
NetChoice v. Yost (Ohio)
S.D. Ohio · Effective 2024-04-30 · NetChoice, LLC v. Yost, No. 2:24-cv-00047 (S.D. Ohio Apr. 30, 2024)
Ohio's Social Media Parental Notification Act — requiring parental consent for minors' social-media use, including algorithmic feeds — was permanently enjoined as unconstitutional in April 2024.
-
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 St. Louis, Missouri
Are there AI laws in St. Louis, Missouri?
What federal AI rules apply in St. Louis?
Does Missouri have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Missouri?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in St. Louis?
How do I report an AI law violation in St. Louis?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in St. Louis?
Is St. Louis regulated by Missouri's consumer privacy act?
Have we missed an AI rule in St. Louis?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a St. Louis ordinance, county rule, or local enforcement action we should add, email [email protected] or submit a correction. Every entry must include a verifiable source.