HomeAI LawsMinnesotaSaint Paul

AI Laws in Saint Paul, Minnesota

As of 2026-06-17, AI Laws USA tracks 18 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Saint Paul, Minnesota: 10+ federal protections, 7 Minnesota state-level rules, and 1 local Saint Paul ordinance. Coverage is strongest on consumer data privacy, automated decision-making, children's online safety, and consumer protection. 7 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.

Saint Paul local AI rules (and Ramsey County)

1 local AI rule specific to Saint Paul, Minnesota or Ramsey County.

  1. In effect Limited protection

    Saint Paul Public Schools

    Saint Paul, MN · Effective 2024-10-08 · Saint Paul Public Schools — Generative AI Acceptable Use Guidance (2024-10-08)

    Guidance requires Microsoft Copilot enterprise as default AI for staff, bars use of consumer ChatGPT with student data, requires teacher disclosure to families when AI is used for instructional design, and prohibits AI-generated discipline recommendations without administrator review.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

Minnesota-level AI rules

7 Minnesota state rules apply to residents and businesses in Saint Paul. Sorted strongest first.

  1. In effect Limited protection

    Minnesota Consumer Data Privacy Act

    Minnesota · Effective 2025-07-31 · 2024 Minn. Laws ch. 123 (HF 4757); Minn. Stat. §§ 325M.01–.21

    Minnesota's privacy law gives residents data rights plus something unique: the right to question automated profiling decisions with significant effects — including the right to know why the decision was made and what would change the outcome. Full AG enforcement began February 2026.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  2. In effect Moderate protection

    MN AG Ellison

    MN · Effective 2026-01-15 · MN AG Ellison — Consumer Privacy Alert on Biometric Authentication and AI Surveillance (2026-01-15)

    Ellison alert and online reporting tool warn residents about AI-powered ID/tracking using biometric, app, and vehicle data; recommends disabling FaceID/TouchID. Follows expert filings in Kohls v. Ellison deepfake case.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  3. In effect Moderate protection

    MN drone-warrant law (2020)

    Minnesota · Effective 2020-08-01 · Minn. Stat. § 626.19

    Minnesota requires police to get a search warrant before using a drone, with narrow exceptions, and to publish an annual public report listing every drone deployment, purpose, and cost. The annual transparency requirement is among the strongest in any state drone law.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  4. In effect Limited protection

    Minnesota SF 4097 (social-media algorithm disclosure)

    Minnesota · Effective 2025-07-01 · Minn. Stat. 325M.30-325M.34; Laws 2024, ch. 114, art. 3, sec. 63 (SF 4097)

    Minnesota requires large social media platforms to publicly explain how their algorithmic ranking systems decide what users see. Among other things, a platform must disclose how its own content-quality judgments and a user's stated content preferences are weighted against other ranking signals. The rules apply to platforms doing business in or targeting Minnesotans that have more than 10,000 monthly active users.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  5. In effect Limited protection

    Minnesota HF 2432 (AI-generated CSAM)

    Minnesota · Effective 2025-08-01 · Minn. Stat. 617.246; Laws 2025, ch. 35 (HF 2432)

    Minnesota expanded its child sexual abuse material law to cover images produced with generative AI. The definition now reaches a visual depiction of someone indistinguishable from an actual minor that is created by feeding prompts into generative AI or similar technology, shows the person engaged in sexual conduct, and is obscene. This closes a gap so that synthetic, AI-generated imagery can be prosecuted under the existing CSAM framework.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  6. In effect Limited protection

    MN Deepfake Law

    Minnesota · Effective 2023-08-01 · 2023 Minn. Laws ch. 58 (HF 1370); Minn. Stat. §§ 617.261, 211B.16

    Minnesota criminalized two kinds of AI deepfakes in 2023: nonconsensual intimate deepfakes of anyone, and election deepfakes of candidates distributed within 90 days of an election without consent. Victims of intimate deepfakes can also sue. X Corp. has challenged the election provision in court.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  7. Blocked / in litigation Limited protection

    MN HF 1370 (partially enjoined)

    MN · Effective 2023-08-01 · Minn. Stat. ch. 58 (2023); Kohls v. Ellison, No. 0:24-cv-03754 (D. Minn.)

    Minnesota HF 1370 criminalized election deepfakes (it remains in effect for non-consensual intimate imagery). The election-deepfake portions were challenged in Kohls v. Ellison (D. Minn.) — preliminary injunction motion fully briefed and awaiting 8th Circuit appellate review.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

Full Minnesota jurisdiction page →

Federal AI rules that apply in Saint Paul, Minnesota

These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including Saint Paul, Minnesota. Showing the 10 strongest and most recent.

  1. 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.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  2. 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.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  3. 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.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  4. 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.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  5. 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.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  6. 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.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  7. 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.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  8. 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.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  9. 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.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  10. 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.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

See all federal AI rules →

Frequently asked questions about AI laws in Saint Paul, Minnesota

Are there AI laws in Saint Paul, Minnesota?
Yes. We index 1 local AI rule that specifically apply in Saint Paul, Minnesota, including Saint Paul Public Schools. On top of that, 7 Minnesota state-level rules and 10+ federal AI protections apply throughout the city.
What federal AI rules apply in Saint Paul?
Every federal AI protection in our index applies in Saint Paul, Minnesota. The highest-strength federal rules currently include Bartz v. Anthropic, Banner v. Tesla (Autopilot), COPPA + 2025 Rule (childrens data). 10+ federal entries are tracked in total.
Does Minnesota have an AI privacy law?
Minnesota has 4 privacy- or automated-decision-related AI rules in our index, including MN AG Ellison and MN drone-warrant law (2020). These apply to residents of Saint Paul.
Are deepfakes illegal in Minnesota?
Minnesota has 3 deepfake- or AI-image-related laws in our index, including MN Deepfake Law and Minnesota HF 2432 (AI-generated CSAM). Additionally, the federal TAKE IT DOWN Act covers non-consensual intimate-image deepfakes nationwide.
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Saint Paul?
Saint Paul, Minnesota has no AI-employment-screening-specific rule in our index. Federal Title VII, ADA, and EEOC guidance still apply, plus any general Minnesota anti-discrimination statutes.
How do I report an AI law violation in Saint Paul?
Most AI rules are enforced by an agency listed on each individual entry. For Minnesota state laws, the Minnesota Attorney General's office is the usual starting point. For federal AI rules, file complaints with the relevant federal agency (FTC, EEOC, HUD, CFPB, etc.) named on each protection entry. We also accept tips at [email protected].
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Saint Paul?
Facial-recognition use in Saint Paul, Minnesota is addressed by MN AG Ellison. See those entries for what is allowed, who must comply, and enforcement details.
Is Saint Paul regulated by Minnesota's consumer privacy act?
Yes. Minnesota state laws apply uniformly to residents and businesses operating in Saint Paul. See the Minnesota jurisdiction page for the complete list of consumer-protection and privacy rules.

Have we missed an AI rule in Saint Paul?

This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Saint Paul ordinance, county rule, or local enforcement action we should add, email [email protected] or submit a correction. Every entry must include a verifiable source.