AI police report laws by state
Two states have enacted laws on AI-written police reports. California’s SB 524 requires disclosure, officer signature, keeping the first AI draft, an audit trail, and limits on vendor data use. Utah’s SB 180 requires an agency policy, a disclaimer, and officer certification. Bills are moving in New Jersey, New York, and Virginia, and Connecticut’s prosecutors have paused AI-drafted reports statewide. Click a state for the details and sources.
The map
- Enacted
- Restricted (prosecutor)
- Pending
- Carried over
- Local action
- Failed
- Lapsed
- No specific law
California
SB 524 (Penal Code §13663)
EnactedSigned Oct 10, 2025 · Effective Jan 1, 2026
Every agency must keep a policy requiring any official report written fully or partly with AI to name each AI program used and state, on each page or in the text, “This report was written either fully or in part using artificial intelligence.” The officer signs to verify the facts are true and correct. The first AI draft must be kept as long as the final report, and only the final signed report counts as the officer’s statement. Agencies keep an audit trail of who used AI and which video or audio it drew on. Vendors may not share or sell agency data except for the agency’s purposes or under a court order.
- AI disclosure on the report
- Officer certifies accuracy
- Keep the first AI draft
- Audit trail
- Limits on vendor data use
- Written agency AI policy
State by state
Every tracked law, bill, and prosecutor action, with what it requires. Local actions apply to that county only. States not listed have no specific law, bill, or prosecutor policy we could find.
| State | Law or action | Status | AI disclosure on the report | Officer certifies accuracy | Keep the first AI draft | Audit trail | Limits on vendor data use | Written agency AI policy |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California | SB 524 (Penal Code §13663) Signed Oct 10, 2025 · Effective Jan 1, 2026 | Enacted | ||||||
| Connecticut | Chief State’s Attorney moratorium Announced April 2026 | Restricted (prosecutor) | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Michigan | Wayne County Prosecutor September 2026 | Local action | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Minnesota | SF 4575 / HF 4536 Introduced 2026 · no further action | Lapsed | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Nevada | SB 199 (2025) 2025 session · no further action | Failed | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| New Jersey | A3076 Introduced Jan 13, 2026 | Pending | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| New York | S10425 / A9253-A In Codes committee (2025–26 session) | Pending | – | – | ||||
| Texas | Hays County September 2026 | Local action | – | – | – | – | – | – |
| Utah | SB 180 (Utah Code 53-25-601, -602) Effective May 7, 2025 | Enacted | – | – | – | |||
| Utah | SB 205 (2026) Not passed · filed Mar 6, 2026 | Failed | – | – | – | – | – | |
| Virginia | HB 1294 Continued to 2027 | Carried over | – | – | – | |||
| Washington | King County Prosecuting Attorney’s Office Memo, September 2024 | Local action | – | – | – | – | – | – |
What this means for agencies
The enacted laws and pending bills converge on the same handful of safeguards. Building them into policy now covers most of what any state is likely to ask for.
- 01
Label it
Say on the report that AI helped write it, and name the tool. California and Utah both require this.
- 02
Officer review and signature
The officer reads, corrects, and signs to verify the facts. Required in California and Utah.
- 03
Keep the first draft
Retain the AI’s first draft as long as the final report, so changes can be checked later. Required in California and proposed in New York and Virginia.
- 04
Audit trail to the footage
Record who used AI and which video or audio it drew on. Required in California and proposed in New York and Virginia.
- 05
Limit vendor data use
Contracts should bar vendors from sharing or selling agency data. Required in California.
- 06
Ask your prosecutor
Some prosecutors won’t accept AI-assisted narratives, or have paused them. Check local expectations before you deploy.
Frequently asked questions
- Which states have laws on AI-written police reports?
- Two states have enacted laws: California (SB 524, effective January 1, 2026) and Utah (SB 180, effective May 7, 2025). Bills are pending or carried over in New Jersey (A3076), New York (S10425 / A9253-A), and Virginia (HB 1294). Connecticut has a statewide prosecutor moratorium rather than a statute.
- What does California SB 524 require?
- Agencies must have a policy requiring AI-assisted reports to name the AI program used and carry the statement “This report was written either fully or in part using artificial intelligence,” with the officer’s signature verifying the facts. The first AI draft must be kept as long as the final report, an audit trail must record who used AI and which footage it drew on, and vendors may not share or sell agency data except for the agency’s purposes or under a court order.
- What does Utah SB 180 require?
- A written agency policy on generative AI, a disclaimer on any report or record created wholly or partly with generative AI, and a certification from the author that they read and reviewed it for accuracy. Utah does not require agencies to keep the AI draft.
- Are AI-written police reports banned anywhere?
- Not by state statute. Connecticut’s Chief State’s Attorney imposed a statewide moratorium in April 2026, and the King County (Washington) Prosecuting Attorney’s Office has said it will not accept AI-assisted police narratives. Proposed statutory bans in Nevada (SB 199, 2025) and Minnesota (SF 4575 / HF 4536, 2026) did not pass.
- Is there a federal law on AI police reports?
- No federal statute specifically governs AI-assisted police reports. Agencies follow state law, local prosecutor policies, and their own written AI policies.
- How should an agency prepare if its state has no law yet?
- Most proposals converge on the same safeguards: label AI-assisted reports, have the officer review and sign, keep the first draft, record an audit trail tied to the source footage, and limit what vendors can do with agency data. Adopting those as written policy now keeps an agency ahead of most bills, and it is worth asking your local prosecutor how they treat AI-assisted reports before you deploy.
Method and disclaimer
This tracker covers state laws, bills, and prosecutor policies that specifically address AI-assisted or AI-generated police reports. Each entry was checked against the legislature’s own bill page or statute text, or the prosecutor’s announcement, and linked so you can confirm it. Where no primary document is published online, we link the news report that documents it. Broader government-AI and facial-recognition laws are outside this tracker’s scope.
Last verified October 18, 2026. Laws in this area change quickly. This is a research summary, not legal advice: confirm the current text and status with the official source and your agency’s counsel before relying on it. Spotted a change? Tell us.