HF4536

Purpose

This bill would restrict how generative artificial intelligence (AI) can be used by government entities when creating official government records. It defines what counts as an official record and sets up penalties and remedies if the rule is violated.

What is prohibited

• A government entity must not use artificial intelligence to create an official record or to draft an official record.
• Drafts of official records must be kept for as long as the final official record is kept.

Definitions (key terms)

• Artificial intelligence (AI): machine-based technology that can infer from input to generate outputs such as content decisions, predictions, or recommendations. It includes generative technologies used to write or help write. It does not include technologies used to dictate or automatically generate captions.
• Official record: any recorded information created, received, or maintained by a government entity that documents its official actions, policies, decisions, or functions.
• Government entity: as defined in state law (a specific government unit or agency).
• Draft: a preliminary version of an official record.

Enforcement and remedies

• Enforcement: The Attorney General may enforce this prohibition.
• Private right of action: Individuals may sue a government entity to obtain equitable or declaratory relief to enforce the prohibition. If a plaintiff wins, they may receive reasonable attorney fees and costs.
• Notice to cure: Before filing a lawsuit, a plaintiff must provide written notice of the alleged violation to the government entity at least 90 days in advance, in a way that reasonably allows the entity to fix the problem.

What changes about existing law

• Establishes a new prohibition within Minnesota law (creating a specific rule under a new chapter) that bans using generative AI to create or draft official government records.
• Creates both public (Attorney General) and private remedies, including the potential for attorney’s fees to the winning party.
• Introduces a mandatory pre-suit notice period (90 days) to give government entities a chance to cure the violation.
• Clarifies retention requirements for AI-generated drafts, tying them to the retention of the final official record.
• Explicitly excludes caption-generating technologies from the AI prohibition.

Significance and potential impact

• Aims to ensure human-created or human-verified documentation remains the basis for official records.
• Could affect how government offices handle drafting and recordkeeping if AI tools would otherwise be used.
• Introduces new accountability mechanisms for violations of these rules.

Relevant Terms - generative artificial intelligence - official record - government entity - AI (artificial intelligence) - drafts - retention - attorney general - enforcement - civil action - equitable relief - declaratory relief - notice to cure - 90 days - captions (captioning)