Home › AI Laws › Washington › Seattle
AI Laws in Seattle, Washington
As of 2026-06-17, AI Laws USA tracks 36 AI rules that apply to people and businesses in Seattle, Washington: 10+ federal protections, 13 Washington state-level rules, and 13 local Seattle/county ordinances. Coverage is strongest on AI disclosure and transparency, government use of AI, consumer data privacy, and automated decision-making. 20 of these rules are already in effect. Each entry below links to its official source.
Seattle local AI rules (and King County)
13 local AI rules specific to Seattle, Washington or King County.
-
In effect Moderate protection
Seattle Surveillance Ordinance
Seattle, WA · Effective 2017-09-01 · Seattle Ordinance 125376 (2017), SMC ch. 14.18, as amended 2018
Seattle requires city departments to get City Council approval before acquiring or using surveillance technologies, supported by public Surveillance Impact Reports and review by a community working group. One of the earliest and most comprehensive municipal surveillance-oversight laws in the country.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect) Moderate protection
Seattle Data Center Moratorium
Seattle, WA · Enacted 2026-06-09 · Seattle Council Bill 121214 (adopted June 9, 2026)
On June 9, 2026 the Seattle City Council unanimously passed an emergency one-year moratorium on siting new large data centers (power capacity over 20 megavolt-amperes) while the city studies impacts on the electric grid, water, utility rates, land use, jobs, and public health. It is a temporary pause on large facilities, not a permanent citywide ban: existing data centers may continue operating and expand up to the 20 MVA cap, and the moratorium can be extended once for six months. As of June 11, 2026 it awaited the mayor's signature.
-
In effect Limited protection
Seattle Generative AI Policy
Seattle, WA · Effective 2023-11-01 · City of Seattle, GenAI Policy POL-209 (eff. Nov. 1, 2023)
Seattle's generative AI policy governs how city employees use tools like ChatGPT. It requires attribution of AI-generated work, human review of all AI output before release, and limits on feeding personal information into AI systems, built around seven principles including bias reduction, transparency, and explainability.
-
In effect Moderate protection
Seattle Surveillance Ordinance (SMC 14.18)
Seattle, WA · Effective 2017-08-02 · Ord. 125376 (2017-08-02)
Requires council review and approval of all city surveillance technologies, with public process and use policies.
-
In effect Limited protection
Seattle Public Schools AI Handbook + Superintendent Procedure 2022SP
Seattle, WA · Effective 2025-02-01 · Seattle Public Schools AI Handbook + Superintendent Procedure 2022SP (2025-02-01)
Handbook operates alongside SP 2022SP (Electronic Resources). Requires approved tools to comply with privacy law, treats unauthorized AI use or uncited use as a disciplinary policy breach, and directs schools to teach AI citation.
-
In effect Moderate protection
Seattle Surveillance Acquisition Amendments
Seattle, WA · Effective 2020-08-04 · Seattle, Wash., Council Bill 119909 / Ordinance 126148 (2020)
Seattle amended its 2017 surveillance ordinance to expand which technologies count as surveillance, require equity impact assessments, and strengthen Community Surveillance Working Group review before Seattle agencies acquire new surveillance tools.
-
In effect Limited protection
Seattle GenAI Executive Order
Seattle, WA · Effective 2023-11-06 · Seattle Exec. Order 2023-09 (Nov. 6, 2023)
Seattle's mayor issued an executive order setting interim guardrails on city employee use of generative AI: human review of outputs, no input of confidential information, public-facing disclosure when AI is used, and a citywide policy from Seattle IT.
-
Proposed / pending Proposed or pending
Seattle AI Election Deepfake Bill (proposed)
Seattle, WA · Seattle, Wash., Council Bill 120867 (proposed)
A pending Seattle Council bill that would require disclosure on any AI-generated or substantially altered image, audio, or video about a candidate distributed within 90 days of a Seattle municipal election.
-
Proposed / pending Proposed or pending
Seattle Data Center Zoning
Seattle, WA · Seattle City Council CB 120783 (proposed)
Proposed Seattle ordinance amending the land use code to restrict siting of large data centers in certain industrial and downtown zones and require energy-use disclosures.
-
Proposed / pending Proposed or pending
Seattle AI Procurement (proposed)
Seattle, WA · Seattle City Council CB 120906 (proposed)
Proposed Seattle ordinance setting binding procurement standards for AI systems acquired by city departments, including vendor disclosure of training data sources and required impact assessments.
-
In effect Limited protection
SPD FR Policy
Seattle, WA · Effective 2023-07-01 · Seattle Police Manual §12.045 (2023)
Seattle Police Department Manual policy generally prohibiting SPD officers from using facial recognition technology, with no department-issued FR tools and a ban on requesting third-party FR queries.
-
In effect Moderate protection
King County FR Ban
King County, WA · Enacted 2021-06-01 · King County, Wash., Ordinance 19296 (June 1, 2021)
King County (the Seattle area) was the first US county to ban its government, including the Sheriff's Office, from using facial recognition technology. The unanimous 2021 ordinance also bars county agencies from getting facial recognition information through third parties. Remains in effect as of June 2026.
-
In effect Limited protection
King County GenAI Guidelines
King County, WA · Effective 2024-09-27 · King County, GenAI Guidelines for Employees (Sept. 2024)
King County issued guidelines for employee use of generative AI, developed jointly by King County IT and the Office of Equity, Racial and Social Justice. The guidelines aim to reduce bias and protect sensitive personal data entrusted to the county, with a software review process for GenAI tools.
Washington-level AI rules most relevant to Seattle
13 Washington state rules apply to residents and businesses in Seattle. Showing the 8 most relevant to Seattle's local picture; 5 more are on the Washington jurisdiction page.
-
In effect Moderate protection
WA SB 6280 (2020, first-in-nation state FR-government law)
WA · Effective 2021-07-01 · RCW Ch. 43.386 (SB 6280, 2020)
Washington SB 6280 (signed March 31, 2020) was the first U.S. state law expressly regulating state and local government use of facial recognition. It requires accountability reports, public notice, warrant requirements for ongoing surveillance, and independent testing for accuracy and bias. Codified at RCW Ch. 43.386. Still in effect 2026.
-
In effect Moderate protection
Plateau Peoples TK/BC Labels
Plateau Peoples' Web Portal (Multi-Tribal) · Effective 2015-01-01 · Plateau Peoples' Web Portal — multi-tribal TK/BC Labels initiative
Six Plateau tribes — Colville, Umatilla, Warm Springs, Yakama, Spokane, and Coeur d'Alene — jointly implement Local Contexts Traditional Knowledge and Biocultural Labels on digital cultural-heritage collections. A working Indigenous data sovereignty mechanism applicable to AI training data: labels travel with the data and assert community-defined access and use rules.
-
In effect Limited protection
My Health My Data Act
Washington · Effective 2024-03-31 · RCW ch. 19.373
A sweeping health-data privacy law covering 'consumer health data' far beyond HIPAA — including biometric data, health inferences drawn by algorithms, and reproductive health information. Companies need consent to collect or share such data, must honor deletion requests, and cannot geofence health facilities. Consumers can sue under Washington's Consumer Protection Act.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect) Limited protection
HB 2225 (WA Chatbot Safety)
Washington · Effective 2027-01-01 · Wash. HB 2225, Ch. 168, 2026 Laws; RCW 19.86.093
Washington requires AI companion chatbots to clearly tell users they are talking to an AI, not a person. Operators must have crisis protocols — connecting distressed users to the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline — and additional safeguards for minors. If a company violates the law, consumers can sue under Washington's Consumer Protection Act and recover actual damages, an injunction, and attorney's fees. Effective January 1, 2027.
-
Enacted (not yet in effect) Limited protection
HB 1170 (WA AI Content Disclosure)
Washington · Effective 2027-02-01 · Wash. E2SHB 1170 (2026); Ch. 167, 2026 Laws
Large AI image, video, and audio generators must embed hard-to-remove provenance data — watermarks or tamper-resistant metadata — in every piece of synthetic content they create. This lets journalists, courts, and the public identify AI-generated media. Applies to services with over 1 million monthly users. Enforced by the Washington Attorney General under the Consumer Protection Act. Effective February 1, 2027.
-
In effect Limited protection
SB 5152 (Election Synthetic Media)
Washington · Effective 2023-07-23 · RCW ch. 42.62 (SB 5152, 2023)
Election ads in Washington that use AI-manipulated or synthetic depictions of candidates must disclose it. Candidates harmed by undisclosed synthetic media can sue for damages and injunctive relief.
-
In effect Limited protection
WA Biometric Identifiers Act (2017)
WA · Effective 2017-07-23 · RCW Ch. 19.375 (HB 1493, 2017)
Washington's 2017 HB 1493 was the third state biometric privacy law (after IL BIPA and TX CUBI). It requires notice and consent before 'enrolling' a biometric identifier in a database for a commercial purpose, but excludes photographs and audio recordings — a significant carve-out that distinguishes it from BIPA. Enforced by the Washington AG; no private right of action.
-
In effect Moderate protection
WA EO 24-01
WA · Effective 2024-01-19 · Wash. Exec. Order No. 24-01 (Jan. 19, 2024)
Governor Inslee's EO 24-01 directs WaTech to develop generative AI guidelines for Washington state government, identify high-value GenAI initiatives, and catalog high-risk uses across agencies.
Federal AI rules that apply in Seattle, Washington
These federal protections apply everywhere in the United States, including Seattle, Washington. 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 Seattle, Washington
Are there AI laws in Seattle, Washington?
What federal AI rules apply in Seattle?
Does Washington have an AI privacy law?
Are deepfakes illegal in Washington?
Can my employer use AI to screen me for jobs in Seattle?
How do I report an AI law violation in Seattle?
Are facial recognition cameras allowed in Seattle?
Is Seattle regulated by Washington's consumer privacy act?
Have we missed an AI rule in Seattle?
This page is generated from our open civic dataset. If you know of a Seattle ordinance, county rule, or local enforcement action we should add, email [email protected] or submit a correction. Every entry must include a verifiable source.