Massachusetts AI Laws and Regulation (2026)

Massachusetts regulates AI through a combination of executive action and targeted statutes rather than a single comprehensive law. Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell's April 2024 advisory confirmed that Chapter 93A consumer protection and anti-discrimination laws apply fully to AI systems, while H.4744 criminalizes AI-generated deepfake intimate images.

Massachusetts is emerging as one of the most active states in AI policy, combining executive action, attorney general enforcement guidance, and an ambitious legislative agenda. While the state does not yet have a single comprehensive AI regulatory law on the books, it has taken significant steps through executive orders, targeted legislation on deepfakes and healthcare AI, and aggressive attorney general guidance that applies existing consumer protection and civil rights laws to artificial intelligence systems.

This guide covers every enacted law, executive action, and pending bill that affects how AI is developed, deployed, and used in Massachusetts as of September 2026.

Massachusetts AI Executive Actions

Executive Order 629: AI Strategic Task Force (February 2024)

On February 14, 2024, Governor Maura Healey signed Executive Order 629, establishing the Artificial Intelligence Strategic Task Force. The Task Force was charged with studying AI and generative AI technology and its effects on state government, private businesses, higher education institutions, and Massachusetts residents.

The Task Force brought together 25 members, including legislators, industry leaders, and academic experts. Its mandate included conducting stakeholder outreach, advising the Governor and executive branch on AI implementation, and identifying ways to encourage leading industries to adopt AI technology responsibly.

The Task Force released its 2024 Report to the Governor, providing recommendations on how the Commonwealth should approach AI governance, economic development, and workforce preparation.

The FutureTech Act (July 2024)

Governor Healey filed the FutureTech Act in January 2024, and it was signed into law in July 2024. The legislation authorized $1.23 billion in bond authorization to modernize state IT systems from 2025 to 2029, with $25 million specifically dedicated to AI projects that improve government operations and digital services for residents.

The Act represents the state's commitment to using AI as a tool for better governance, funding projects in cybersecurity, user experience improvements, and emerging technology applications.

Applied AI Hub Initiative

Building on the FutureTech Act, Governor Healey has proposed $100 million in economic development legislation to create an Applied AI Hub in Massachusetts. The funding would support a capital grant program to drive AI adoption for solving public policy challenges and to maintain the state's leadership position in technology sectors including life sciences, healthcare, financial services, advanced manufacturing, robotics, and education.

Attorney General AI Advisory (April 2024)

On April 16, 2024, Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell issued a formal advisory on AI, clarifying how existing state laws apply to artificial intelligence systems. This advisory is one of the most comprehensive state-level AG guidance documents on AI in the country and carries significant enforcement weight.

Consumer Protection Under Chapter 93A

The advisory confirms that Massachusetts' Consumer Protection Act (Chapter 93A) applies fully to AI systems. Under this framework, it is unfair or deceptive to:

• Falsely advertise the quality, value, or usability of AI systems
• Supply an AI system that is defective, unusable, or impractical for the purpose advertised
• Misrepresent the reliability, performance, safety, or condition of an AI system
• Fail to disclose material limitations or risks of an AI system

Businesses that violate Chapter 93A through their use of AI face civil penalties, injunctive relief, and potential class action lawsuits.

Anti-Discrimination Requirements

The advisory makes clear that the Commonwealth's anti-discrimination laws prohibit developers, suppliers, and users of AI from deploying systems that discriminate based on legally protected characteristics. This applies whether discrimination is intentional or results from biased training data or algorithmic design.

This means that an employer using an AI hiring tool that disproportionately screens out candidates based on race, gender, age, or disability could face liability under existing Massachusetts civil rights law, even if the employer did not intend to discriminate.

Data Security Obligations

AI systems must comply with Massachusetts' Standards for the Protection of Personal Information (201 CMR 17.00). Developers, suppliers, and users of AI must take steps to safeguard personal information processed by their systems and must comply with breach notification requirements when personal data is compromised.

Deepfake and Synthetic Media Laws

H.4744: Criminalizing Non-Consensual Intimate Images Including Deepfakes (2024)

In 2024, Governor Healey signed H.4744, "An Act to Prevent Abuse and Exploitation," making Massachusetts one of the last states to criminalize the non-consensual distribution of intimate images. Critically, the law explicitly covers AI-generated deepfakes.

The law defines "digitization" as "the creation or alteration of visual material, including, but not limited to through the use of computer-generated images in a manner that would falsely appear to a reasonable person to be an authentic representation of the person depicted." This broad definition captures AI-generated deepfake pornography.

The deepfake provision is codified at General Laws chapter 265, section 43A(b), within the criminal harassment statute. That section, not the bill number, is the operative law to read for the current text.

Penalties for Non-Consensual Intimate Image Distribution

Section 43A sets no separate penalty tier for images depicting a minor. It provides only that nothing in the section precludes a prosecution under General Laws chapter 272, section 29C, the child pornography statute.

The law requires proof that the person distributing the images either intended to cause harm, harass, intimidate, coerce, or threaten the victim, or recklessly disregarded the risk of such harm.

For minors, the law allows diversion to educational programs about the legal and personal consequences of sexting, rather than requiring criminal punishment.

Political Deepfake Disclosure Legislation (Pending)

The Massachusetts House has voted to approve legislation requiring political advertisements using AI-generated synthetic media to include a clear disclosure stating "contains content generated by AI," with the disclosure appearing at both the beginning and end of any audio or video political ad. This legislation remains pending in the 194th session.

Healthcare AI Restrictions

SB 2632: AI in Mental Health and Utilization Review (Pending)

On October 16, 2025, SB 2632 was reported favorably out of the Senate Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity and referred to the Committee on Health Care Financing, which itself recommended the bill "ought to pass" and referred it to Senate Ways and Means on April 2, 2026. The bill has not yet received a vote on the Senate floor. If enacted as written, it would set the following boundaries on AI's role in healthcare.

Mental and Behavioral Health Provisions

As introduced, SB 2632 would prohibit AI from making independent therapeutic decisions in a mental or behavioral health setting, and would require that all treatment plans and patient interactions involving AI be reviewed by a licensed professional. The bill would also require transparency: patients would need to be informed when AI is used in their care and would need to provide explicit consent before AI tools are applied to their treatment.

Insurance Utilization Review Restrictions

As introduced, the legislation would restrict how insurance carriers use AI in utilization review and administrative functions. Specifically, it would prohibit AI from replacing human decision-making or being used in ways that could result in discrimination against insured individuals, and would require carriers or utilization review organizations using AI tools for claims adjudication to provide disclosures and ensure that determinations of medical necessity are made by licensed professionals.

S.46: The Original Bill Behind S.2632

Senate Bill 46, filed by Senators Moore and Eldridge, was the original healthcare AI decision-making bill in the 194th session; on October 16, 2025 it was redrafted into S.2632, the bill discussed above. It is not a separate pending measure.

AI in Employment and Algorithmic Discrimination

SD 3007: Non-Discrimination in Algorithmic Systems

Introduced on June 26, 2025, and referred to the Committee on Advanced Information Technology on September 4, 2025, SD 3007 has the potential to become one of the most comprehensive AI employment discrimination laws in the country.

SD 3007 explicitly targets AI tools used across a wide variety of employment contexts and would provide individuals with a clear legal path to hold employers accountable for discriminatory impacts of automated decision-making tools, regardless of whether the employer was aware of the discrimination. Key provisions include:

• Requiring employers to disclose when AI tools are used in hiring, promotion, or termination decisions
• Establishing a disparate impact framework specifically for algorithmic decision systems
• Creating a private right of action for individuals harmed by discriminatory AI
• Mandating impact assessments before deploying AI in high-stakes employment decisions

The F.A.I.R. Act (S.35): AI in the Workplace

On September 11, 2025, the Joint Committee on Advanced IT hosted a hearing on The F.A.I.R. Act (S.35), An Act Fostering Artificial Intelligence Responsibility. This bill would:

• Regulate AI deployment in the workplace
• Guard against worker surveillance through AI tools
• Protect human autonomy and expertise in workplace decisions
• Establish transparency requirements for employers using AI systems

The Massachusetts AFL-CIO has been a strong advocate for the F.A.I.R. Act, emphasizing the need to protect workers from unchecked AI deployment.

Pending AI Bills in the 194th Session (2025-2026)

Massachusetts has one of the most active AI legislative agendas in the country. Here are the key pending bills.

Consumer Protection and Accountability

H.94 (HD 396): Artificial Intelligence Accountability and Consumer Protection Act. This bill would regulate high-risk AI systems and impose obligations on developers and deployers, including requirements for maintaining risk management programs and conducting impact assessments. It follows a framework similar to Colorado's landmark AI Act.

S.264: AI Chatbot Consumer Protection. Filed by Senator Montigny, this bill would protect consumers interacting with artificial intelligence chatbots, likely requiring disclosure when users are interacting with AI rather than a human.

Safety and Harm Prevention

H.524: AI Self-Harm Penalties. This bill would impose penalties on entities whose AI models suggest harming oneself or another person. It reflects growing concerns about AI chatbots providing harmful content.

S.760: Kids Chatbot Safety. Introduced in late December 2025, this bill would prohibit chatbot operators from offering products to minors unless the chatbot is incapable of encouraging self-harm, suicidal ideation, violence, drug or alcohol consumption, or disordered eating.

AI Personhood and Housing

H.469: AI Non-Sentience Declaration. This bill would declare artificial intelligence systems nonsentient and prohibit them from obtaining legal personhood, addressing philosophical and legal questions about AI status.

H.389: AI in Rental Housing. This bill would restrict the use of artificial intelligence to affect rental housing pricing and availability, targeting algorithmic pricing tools used by landlords and property management companies.

General AI Regulation

H.81: AI Disclosure Requirements. Filed by Representative Howitt of Seekonk, this bill addresses artificial intelligence disclosure obligations.

H.77: General AI Regulation. Filed by Representative Farley-Bouvier of Pittsfield, this bill proposes comprehensive regulation of artificial intelligence use.

S.37: AI Economic Development and Safety. Filed by Senator Finegold, this bill aims to promote economic development with emerging AI models while addressing safety concerns.

Massachusetts Data Privacy Act and AI

The Massachusetts Senate unanimously passed the Massachusetts Data Privacy Act (MDPA) 40-0 on September 25, 2025. Originally introduced as SB 2608 and refiled as SB 2619, the MDPA proposes sweeping reforms that would directly affect AI systems. The House passed its own version 146-0 on June 4, 2026, and the two chambers are now reconciling their differences in a conference committee.

The MDPA would ban the sale of sensitive data, including biometric, health, and geolocation information that AI systems frequently rely on. It would enhance data privacy rights for minors and impose strict limits on data collection practices. If enacted, the MDPA would create one of the strongest data privacy frameworks in the country and would significantly restrict the types of personal data available for AI training and deployment.

Federal AI Policy Impact on Massachusetts

Massachusetts is affected by several federal AI developments. The federal TAKE IT DOWN Act, signed into law, prohibits the nonconsensual publication of intimate images including AI-generated deepfakes, supplementing Massachusetts' H.4744.

Representative Jake Auchincloss (D-MA) introduced the Deepfake Liability Act in December 2025, a bipartisan bill that would change how federal law treats websites and apps hosting nonconsensual AI-generated sexual content. This reflects Massachusetts legislators' active role in shaping federal AI policy.

The state's Attorney General advisory explicitly noted that federal frameworks do not preempt state consumer protection and anti-discrimination enforcement. Massachusetts retains full authority to enforce its own laws against AI-related harms, even as federal standards evolve.

More Massachusetts Laws

Looking for information on other Massachusetts laws? Visit our AI Laws by State hub to compare Massachusetts with other states. You can also explore related topics:

• Massachusetts Data Privacy Laws for biometric privacy protections
• Massachusetts Surveillance Camera Laws for monitoring and recording rules
• Massachusetts Background Check Laws for employment screening regulations
• Massachusetts Recording Laws for wiretap and consent rules

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. AI laws and regulations are evolving rapidly, and enforcement interpretations change over time. Consult a licensed attorney in Massachusetts for advice about your specific situation. Last reviewed: September 2026.