Georgia
Georgia AI Laws: SB 444, SB 540 and What's Next (2027)
Independently fact-checked against primary sources (last audited November 5, 2026). · Law checked current as of November 5, 2026. · 16 primary sources cited on this page. How we verify our legal content

As of November 2026, we found two AI-specific statutes enacted in Georgia's 2025 and 2026 sessions, and neither is in force yet: SB 444 (Act 411), the AI utilization review law at O.C.G.A. 33-46-7.1, takes effect January 1, 2027, and SB 540 (Act 518), the AI companion chatbot law at O.C.G.A. 39-5-6, takes effect July 1, 2027.
This page covers Georgia state law, with one short note on the federal layer. We searched the full text of the 2025 and 2026 Summaries of General Statutes and the 2026 Senate composite for AI terms. The summaries describe acts rather than reproduce them, so a provision inside a broader act that its summary does not mention would not appear. For how other states compare, see the US AI laws hub.
SB 444 (Act 411): AI in Utilization Review, O.C.G.A. 33-46-7.1
The official 2026 Summary of General Statutes lists Act 411 as "Effective January 1, 2027," and the bill page shows the Governor signed it May 5, 2026. It is a scheduled law. It adds a new Code section to Chapter 46 of Title 33, which covers the certification of private review agents.

The act allows AI. Private review agents and utilization review entities "may use artificial intelligence systems, artificial intelligence, or other software tools" if those tools are part of a utilization review plan that meets the chapter's standards and the Commissioner's rules.
The limit is in subsection (c). AI systems "shall not issue an adverse determination to a patient until a natural person qualifying as a private review agent or a utilization review entity conducts a utilization review in which a clinical peer participates." The same subsection adds: "In no event shall artificial intelligence systems, artificial intelligence, or other software tools supersede the judgment of such clinical peer."
So the rule is narrower than the phrase "no AI denials." It reaches private review agents and utilization review entities, and it requires a human review with a clinical peer before an adverse determination issues. The act's text sets no penalty of its own. We did not find any Insurance Commissioner rule implementing it, and we did not search the Commissioner's rulemaking record.
SB 540 (Act 518): AI Companion Chatbots, O.C.G.A. 39-5-6
The bill page shows the Governor signed Act 518 on May 11, 2026, and the act "shall become effective on July 1, 2027." Until then its duties do not apply. The enacted text covers AI companion chatbots, not "conversational AI services" in general, which was the wording of the bill as introduced.
Who is covered. An "AI companion chatbot" is "a system using artificial intelligence, generative artificial intelligence, or emotional recognition algorithms designed to simulate a sustained human or human-like relationship with a user" by doing all three of these: retaining information on prior interactions and user preferences, asking unprompted emotion-based questions, and sustaining an ongoing dialogue on matters personal to the user. An "operator" is a person that "owns, controls, or develops and makes available" such a chatbot to users in Georgia.
Who is excluded. The definition leaves out generative AI used solely for a business's internal purposes, tools designed and marketed primarily for software development, research, technical assistance or enterprise productivity, and customer-service chatbots that do not sustain a relationship across multiple interactions or are not designed to elicit emotional attachment. It also leaves out certain smart speakers, narrowly tailored educational tools, and limited video game, film and theme park characters.
Hosting providers, app stores and search engines are not liable solely for providing access, absent direct operation or control. The developer of a conversational AI service made available by a separate operator is also not liable under the section.
What operators will have to do from July 1, 2027:
- Disclosure. Tell users clearly and conspicuously that they are interacting with an AI companion chatbot, at the start of each interaction or session and at least every three hours. The reminder becomes hourly if the operator knows or reasonably should have known the user is a minor, or if the chatbot is directed or marketed toward minors.
- Minors. Institute reasonable measures against sexually explicit visual material, simulated romantic or sexual relationships with a minor, encouraging secrecy from trusted adults, encouraging self-harm, and similar conduct listed in the act. Adopt reasonable measures against engagement techniques directed to a minor, such as variable rewards.
- Crisis protocol. Maintain a protocol for detecting and addressing severe harm or related emotional crises, including referral to the 988 Suicide and Crisis Lifeline or comparable services. Publish a plain-language summary and an annual aggregate count of crisis referrals.
- No false credentials. Not knowingly and intentionally program a chatbot to claim it is licensed to provide professional mental health, behavioral health, medical or counseling services, unless the operator is lawfully authorized.
- Age assurance. Use a commercially reasonable age assurance method before allowing access to a feature that may generate sexually explicit synthetic content. The act limits retention and bars sale of that data.
- Minor account tools. For accounts known to belong to minors, offer reasonable tools to manage screen time and account settings.
Enforcement. The Attorney General "may bring a civil action" for a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per knowing violation, compensatory damages, costs and fees, and an injunction. Each day in violation counts as a separate violation for each user affected. The Attorney General may offer a 30-day cure for a first violation that does not involve knowing misconduct, sexual exploitation of a minor or self-harm related misconduct, and may issue rules and guidance.
The section's text creates no private civil action, but it also says nothing in it shall "impair any other remedy available at law or equity."
Georgia's AI Policy for State Agencies: GTA PS-23-001 and SS-23-002
State agency AI use runs on Georgia Technology Authority (GTA) policy, not statute. GTA's AI Responsible Use Standard, SS-23-002, shows an effective date of December 12, 2023, and sits under the Enterprise AI Responsible Use Policy, PS-23-001.
GTA's guidance for state organizations says: "Prior authorization from GTA is required for any generative AI tools intended for regular organizational usage," including AI-driven transcription, summarization and note-taking. The same guidance says AI note-taking tools are prohibited in State of Georgia Microsoft Teams meetings and other conferencing platforms. These documents bind state organizations. They are not rules for private businesses.

What We Did Not Find: Comprehensive, Hiring and Insurance Rules
The terms "artificial intelligence" and "chatbot" appear in the 2026 summary only for Acts 411 and 518, and "algorithm," "machine learning," "generative" and "deepfake" do not appear in it. "Automated" appears only for defibrillators and traffic enforcement devices. The 2025 summary has no hits for any of those terms.
So we found no comprehensive AI act, no AI employment statute and no frontier-model statute. The limit stated at the top of this page applies. Federal and Georgia anti-discrimination law are outside this search.
The NAIC's implementation map, status as of November 3, 2026, does not list Georgia as adopting the NAIC's model bulletin on insurers' AI use, or under its other insurance-specific guidance. We did not review the Georgia Commissioner's bulletins directly. A web search found no governor's executive order on AI, and we did not review every order on the Governor's site.
Georgia Deepfake Law and AI Note-Takers
Georgia's nude-image transmission offense, O.C.G.A. 16-11-90, was amended by SB 337 (Act 550), effective August 3, 2020, "to include falsely created videographic or still images of other persons," according to the 2020 Summary of General Statutes. SB 9, which would have addressed AI-generated election content, did not pass. See Georgia deepfake laws for the detail.

AI note-takers raise recording-consent questions, covered on the Georgia AI meeting recording laws page.
Federal AI Policy and Georgia
As of November 4, 2026, we found no federal statute, scanning the titles of the public laws of the 119th Congress, that sets general rules for private AI systems or generally preempts state AI laws. In December 2025, Executive Order 14365 directed federal agencies to challenge or discourage state AI laws the administration views as conflicting with national policy, and called for a federal framework from Congress. The order itself does not declare any state law invalid. See Trump's AI executive orders and state AI law preemption.
Georgia AI Bills That Died: SB 9, HB 147 and Others
None of these bills appears in the 2025 or 2026 enacted summaries. The last actions come from the legislature's bill pages and its 2026 Senate composite, stamped Session Final, May 14, 2026.
| Bill | Subject | Last action found |
|---|---|---|
| SB 9 | "Ensuring Accountability for Illegal AI Activities Act" | House passed a substitute March 27, 2025. Senate disagreed January 28, 2026. |
| SB 37 | "AI Accountability Act" | First read and referred to committee only. |
| SB 455 | Georgia AI Commission | Read and referred February 4, 2026. |
| SB 488 | Torts; generative AI systems | Read second time in the Senate March 4, 2026. Tabled March 6, 2026. |
| HB 147 | GTA annual inventory of state agency AI use | Passed House February 20, 2025. Senate committee reported a substitute March 18, 2026. |
| HB 478 | AI content disclaimer | House second readers February 20, 2025. |
| HB 566 | NO FAKES Act of 2025 (state bill) | House committee reported a substitute February 25, 2026. |
| HB 1399 | Likeness and generative AI (LEGACY Act) | House second readers February 24, 2026. |
| HB 1351 | State government using AI in personnel matters | Referred to a House committee, February 2026. |

What Changes in Georgia AI Law in 2027
- January 1, 2027: SB 444 (Act 411) takes effect, per Section 2 of the act. Adverse determinations in utilization review will need the human review with a clinical peer described above.
- July 1, 2027: SB 540 (Act 518) takes effect, per Section 2 of the act. The Attorney General may issue rules and guidance under subsection (l). We found none as of November 4, 2026, in the sources named on this page.
- January 2027 session: A new General Assembly meets in January 2027, so the bills in the table above would have to be introduced again. We found no pending AI bill that carries into 2027.
More Georgia Laws
Explore other Georgia law topics on Recording Law:
- Georgia Recording Laws
- Georgia Data Privacy Laws
- Georgia Whistleblower Laws
- Georgia Background Check Laws
- Georgia Sexting Laws
- Georgia Deepfake Laws
- Georgia AI Meeting Recording Laws
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Georgia have an AI law?
Yes, two that we found, and neither is in force yet. SB 444 (Act 411), on AI in health utilization review, takes effect January 1, 2027. SB 540 (Act 518), on AI companion chatbots, takes effect July 1, 2027. We found no comprehensive AI act in the state's 2025 or 2026 enacted summaries.
Can health insurers in Georgia use AI to deny claims?
Starting January 1, 2027, SB 444 lets private review agents and utilization review entities use AI as part of a compliant utilization review plan, but AI systems may not issue an adverse determination to a patient until a natural person conducts a utilization review in which a clinical peer participates. AI may not supersede that clinical peer's judgment. The law is scheduled and was not in force on November 4, 2026.
What does Georgia SB 540 require?
Starting July 1, 2027, operators of AI companion chatbots will have to disclose that users are interacting with a chatbot at the start of each session and at least every three hours, or hourly for known or reasonably known minors and chatbots directed or marketed to minors. They will also need reasonable measures to protect minors, a protocol for severe harm and emotional crises, and age assurance before sexually explicit features. Many business, enterprise, customer-service, educational and video game tools are excluded.
Who enforces Georgia's AI chatbot law?
The Georgia Attorney General, once SB 540 takes effect on July 1, 2027. The Attorney General may seek a civil penalty of up to $10,000 per knowing violation, compensatory damages, costs and fees, and an injunction. The section creates no private civil action of its own, though it says it does not impair any other remedy available at law or equity.
Does Georgia regulate AI in hiring?
We found no AI employment statute in Georgia's 2025 or 2026 enacted summaries, which we searched for AI terms. Those summaries describe acts rather than reproduce them, so a provision inside a broader act could be missed.
Does Georgia ban AI deepfakes in political ads?
SB 9, which would have addressed AI-generated election content, never became law. The House passed a substitute in March 2025, the Senate disagreed on January 28, 2026, and the bill does not appear in the 2025 or 2026 enacted summaries.
When do Georgia's AI laws take effect?
SB 444 takes effect January 1, 2027, and SB 540 takes effect July 1, 2027.
Updates
Restated SB 444 from its operative text, corrected SB 540 to the enacted AI companion chatbot law with its exclusions, duties and Attorney General penalties, added both effective dates, and removed the misdated HB 887 entry and the copied federal section.
Independently fact-checked against the cited primary sources; governing law re-checked for recent changes
Corrected the Georgia AI ledger: SB 9 never became law and its enacted framing and penalty table were removed, SB 444 and SB 540 were signed in 2026 and are now covered, the O.C.G.A. 16-11-90 amendment history and repeat-offense prison ranges were fixed, and the mischaracterized HB 993 passage was replaced with the actual text of O.C.G.A. 16-12-100(b.2).
Corrected O.C.G.A. 16-11-90's penalty table and prose: the first-offense felony tier applies only to posting on sites that advertise themselves as hosting sexually explicit content, not to ordinary social-media posting or texting, which is a misdemeanor of a high and aggravated nature unless it is a repeat offense.
The Law Behind This Article
This article rests on the statutory provisions below, held in our own legal record and retrieved from the official source. Tap a section to read the operative text.
Official Code of Georgia Annotated
§ 16-11-90Prohibition on nude or sexually explicit electronic transmissions.In forcecited in 7 of our articles
(a) As used in this Code section, the term: (1) "Harassment" means engaging in conduct directed at a depicted person that is intended to cause substantial emotional harm to the depicted person. (2) "Nudity" means: (A) The showing of the human male or female genitals, pubic area, or buttocks witho
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-09-03 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.ga.gov
Cited in 6 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2023
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Somerville v. White (2016) held that this Code section creates no private right of action. The Court of Appeals of Georgia reversed compensatory and punitive damages awarded to a woman whose nude photographs were emailed to her contacts, because a criminal statute enacted after July 1, 2010 must expressly provide a civil remedy.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Somerville v. White (Court of Appeals of Georgia 2016, 337 Ga. App. 414)✓A trial court found a man violated OCGA 16-11-90 by electronically transmitting nude photos of his ex-girlfriend and awarded her $500 plus $15,000 in punitive damages; the court held the criminal statute creates no private right of action and reversed both awards.
- Rogers v. Dupree (Court of Appeals of Georgia 2017, 340 Ga. App. 811)“…based on a defendant’s counterclaim for “Intentional Tort (OCGA § 16-11-90).” Somerville v. White, 337 Ga. App…”
- Joe Rogers, Jr. v. Hylton B. Dupree (Court of Appeals of Georgia 2017)“…based on a defendant’s counterclaim for “Intentional Tort (OCGA § 16-11-90).” Somerville v. White, 337 Ga. App. 41…”
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Georgia Recording Laws (2026): One-Party Audio, All-Party Video, Georgia Voyeurism and Hidden Camera Laws: Criminal Penalties (2026), Are Deepfakes Illegal in Georgia? O.C.G.A. 16-11-90 (2027)
§ 16-12-100Sexual exploitation of children; reporting violation; civil forfeiture; penalties.In forcecited in 4 of our articles
(a) As used in this Code section, the term: (1) "Minor" means any person under the age of 18 years. (2) "Performance" means any play, dance, or exhibit to be shown to or viewed by an audience. (3) "Producing" means producing, directing, manufacturing, issuing, or publishing. (4) "Sexually explic
Official text (excerpt) · last checked 2026-08-04 · Read the full text in our law library · Verify at legis.ga.gov
Cited in 136 court opinions in our collectionLatest citing opinion in our collection: 2026
In the courts (editorial summary, independently checked):Phagan v. State (1997) held OCGA 16-12-100(b)(1) contains a scienter requirement, so the State must prove the accused knew the person filmed was under 18. New v. State (2014) applied subsection (b)(8), holding residual computer files alone do not establish knowing possession but can when combined with other circumstantial evidence.
Opinions citing this section in our collection:
- Phagan v. State (Supreme Court of Georgia 1997, 268 Ga. 272)✓Phagan videotaped sexually explicit conduct with a 15-year-old girl; the Supreme Court of Georgia held OCGA 16-12-100(b)(1) carries a scienter requirement obliging the State to prove he knew she was under 18, then reversed that conviction over unauthenticated tapes.
- New v. State (Court of Appeals of Georgia 2014, 327 Ga. App. 87)✓Child pornography surfaced as automatic shadow copies on New's computer alongside LimeWire logs and wiping software; the Court of Appeals held backup files plus other circumstantial evidence can prove prior knowing possession under OCGA 16-12-100(b), and upheld 35 counts.
- Phillips v. State (Court of Appeals of Georgia 2004, 269 Ga. App. 619)✓Phillips photographed his landlady's three and five year old daughters naked in a bath; the Court of Appeals found those images not objectively lewd, reversed one OCGA 16-12-100 count as unsupported and the other because the jury charge constructively amended the indictment.
Identified automatically from the court opinions citing this section — not a ranking of which case controls.
Also relied on in: Georgia Sexting Laws: Legal Consequences and Penalties, Georgia Pornography Laws (2026): Age Verification and the Pole Tax
Sources and References
- Georgia SB 444 as passed (Act 411), O.C.G.A. 33-46-7.1(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia SB 540 as passed (Act 518), O.C.G.A. 39-5-6(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia General Assembly, 2025 Summary of General Statutes(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia General Assembly, 2026 Summary of General Statutes(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia SB 444 bill page(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia SB 540 bill page(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia Technology Authority, AI Responsible Use Standard SS-23-002(gta-psg.georgia.gov).gov
- Georgia guidance for state organizations on AI(ai.georgia.gov).gov
- NAIC, Implementation of Model Bulletin on Use of AI Systems by Insurers (status as of Nov. 3, 2026)(content.naic.org)
- Georgia General Assembly, Summary of 2020 General Statutes (Act 550, SB 337)(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia Senate composite status, Session Final, May 14, 2026(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia SB 9 bill page(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia SB 455 bill page(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia HB 147 bill page(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia HB 478 bill page(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia HB 566 bill page(www.legis.ga.gov).gov
- Georgia HB 1399 bill page(www.legis.ga.gov).gov