HomeAI LawsUtahSalt Lake City

AI Laws in Salt Lake City, Utah

As of 2026-06-17, AI Laws USA tracks 28 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Salt Lake City, Utah: 10+ federal protections, 18 Utah state-level rules (no Salt Lake City-specific ordinances are indexed yet). Coverage is strongest on consumer protection, AI disclosure and transparency, AI-generated images, and government use of AI. 12 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.

Salt Lake City local AI rules (and Salt Lake County)

No city- or county-specific AI ordinances are currently indexed for Salt Lake City, Utah.

  1. Honest gap: We don't currently index any Salt Lake City-specific AI ordinances. Federal and Utah state rules still apply throughout the city. Have we missed something? Email [email protected].

Utah-level AI rules most relevant to Salt Lake City

18 Utah state rules apply to residents and businesses in Salt Lake City. Showing the 8 most relevant to Salt Lake City's local picture; 10 more are on the Utah jurisdiction page.

  1. In effect Limited protection

    Utah AI Policy Act

    Utah · Effective 2024-05-01 · Utah Code § 13-72-101 et seq. (SB 149, 2024; amended 2025)

    The first state generative-AI consumer law: businesses can't hide behind AI — they remain liable under consumer protection law for what their chatbots say. People in regulated occupations (like healthcare providers) must proactively disclose AI use in high-risk interactions, and any business must disclose AI use when clearly asked.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  2. In effect Limited protection

    HB 452 (Mental Health Chatbots)

    Utah · Effective 2025-05-07 · Utah Code § 13-2c-101 et seq. (HB 452, 2025)

    Utah regulates AI chatbots that act like therapists: suppliers must clearly disclose the chatbot is not human, may not advertise products mid-conversation without disclosure, and may not sell or share users' individually identifiable health information.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  3. In effect Limited protection

    Utah S.B. 226 (must disclose you're talking to AI on request; AI use no excuse)

    Utah · Effective 2025-05-07 · Utah Laws 2025, S.B. 226; Utah Code 13-75-101 to 13-75-106

    Utah requires businesses using generative AI in consumer interactions to come clean about it. If a consumer clearly asks whether they are dealing with AI, a supplier must disclose they are interacting with generative AI and not a human. People in licensed occupations must prominently disclose AI use up front in 'high-risk' interactions (health, financial, legal, mental-health advice or sensitive data). A safe harbor applies for clear self-identification, and it is no defense that the AI made the offending statement.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  4. In effect Moderate protection

    UT AI Policy Act (SB 149)

    UT · Effective 2024-05-01 · Utah Code §§ 13-2-12, 13-72-101 et seq.; SB 149 (2024)

    Utah was the first state to require regulated professionals (e.g., doctors, lawyers, accountants) to clearly disclose when consumers are interacting with generative AI, and to make companies liable under existing consumer-protection law for any deception their GenAI commits. It also created the Office of AI Policy and a regulatory sandbox.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  5. Enacted (not yet in effect) Limited protection

    Utah HB 276 Provenance Act (AI-content labels + platform provenance duties)

    Utah · Effective 2027-01-01 · Utah Code 13-72c-101 to -301, 63A-16-215 (H.B. 276, 2026)

    This part of Utah's AI Modifications law requires large generative-AI providers to embed a hidden (latent) disclosure in AI-generated or substantially AI-altered image, audio, and video content. Large online platforms must detect provenance data, let users inspect it, and must not strip compliant provenance or digital signatures. From January 1, 2028, capture-device makers must embed a latent disclosure by default. The law also directs the state CIO to set provenance standards for digital content on public-facing state-agency webpages.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  6. Repealed / replaced Unknown

    UT SB 149 (superseded)

    UT · Effective 2024-05-01 · Utah SB 149 (2024) — substantially superseded by SB 226/SB 332 (2025)

    Utah SB 149 was the first-in-nation generative AI disclosure statute (2024), establishing a regulatory sandbox and consumer disclosure requirements. Substantially rewritten and narrowed by SB 226 and SB 332 in 2025.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  7. In effect Moderate protection

    UT HB 101 (2019 AV statute)

    Utah · Effective 2019-05-14 · Utah Code §§ 41-26-101 et seq.

    Utah's AV law expressly allows fully driverless operation, treats the automated driving system as the 'driver' for traffic-law purposes, authorizes commercial AV networks, and preempts local AV regulation.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

  8. In effect Moderate protection

    UT drone-wildfire law

    Utah · Effective 2017-05-09 · Utah Code §§ 65A-3-2.5, 76-6-2410

    Utah responded to repeated incidents of hobby drones grounding aerial firefighting by criminalizing drone operation that interferes with manned aircraft fighting wildfires, conducting search-and-rescue, or supporting law enforcement, and authorizing public-safety agencies to disable or neutralize an intruding drone.

    View full entry →  ·  Official source ↗

See all 18 Utah AI rules →

Federal AI rules that apply in Salt Lake City, Utah

These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including Salt Lake City, Utah. 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 Salt Lake City, Utah

Are there AI laws in Salt Lake City, Utah?
Salt Lake City, Utah does not have any city-specific AI ordinances indexed in our database. However, 18 Utah state-level rules and federal AI protections fully apply within the city limits. See the Utah jurisdiction page for the full state-level breakdown.
What federal AI rules apply in Salt Lake City?
Every federal AI protection in our index applies in Salt Lake City, Utah. 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 Utah have an AI privacy law?
Utah has 4 privacy- or automated-decision-related AI rules in our index, including UT AI Policy Act (SB 149) and UT HB 101 (2019 AV statute). These apply to residents of Salt Lake City.
Are deepfakes illegal in Utah?
Utah has 7 deepfake- or AI-image-related laws in our index, including Utah S.B. 271 (no AI deepfakes of your identity for commercial use without consent) and Utah H.B. 148 (computer-generated CSAM & intimate images count as illegal). 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 Salt Lake City?
Salt Lake City, Utah has no AI-employment-screening-specific rule in our index. Federal Title VII, ADA, and EEOC guidance still apply, plus any general Utah anti-discrimination statutes.
How do I report an AI law violation in Salt Lake City?
Most AI rules are enforced by an agency listed on each individual entry. For Utah state laws, the Utah 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 Salt Lake City?
Salt Lake City, Utah has no facial-recognition-specific rule in our index. Use by private businesses is largely unregulated, while government use is governed by general Fourth Amendment and Utah law.
Is Salt Lake City regulated by Utah's consumer privacy act?
Yes. Utah state laws apply uniformly to residents and businesses operating in Salt Lake City. See the Utah jurisdiction page for the complete list of consumer-protection and privacy rules.

Have we missed an AI rule in Salt Lake City?

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