Bill Commons
Back to policy developments

Policy research briefing

Collection edition: 2026-10-31T03:24:41Z. Status and source-check dates appear per record. Reopening this URL shows the current collection; this link is not an archived snapshot.

Bounded, source-labelled corpus of selected United States state and federal actions, international instruments, and original-author compute-governance research. It is not a complete jurisdictional tracker, legal advice, or a statement that any proposal is binding. Historical policy-event dates are distinct from retrieval health supplied by an operator refresh snapshot.

  1. Colorado SB26-189: Automated Decision-Making Technology

Colorado SB26-189: Automated Decision-Making Technology

Enacted Colorado law repealing and reenacting Part 17 for covered automated decision-making technology in consequential decisions; most provisions take effect 1 January 2027.

Automated source check: observed.

Issuer
Colorado General Assembly
Jurisdiction / parties
Colorado, United States
Instrument
state law
Status
enacted future effective · as of 2026-05-14
Published
2026-05-14
Last source check
2026-10-31T07:30:18.124533+00:00

What the instrument says

Manual primary-PDF audit; runtime refresh should use official bill HTML because the signed PDF exceeds the 2 MiB fetch bound.

  • Developer of covered ADMT

    Make specified intended-use, limitations, input-category, and principal-factor documentation available to deployers.

    Date / deadline: 2027-01-01

    SB26-189 §6-1-1702(1); §5

  • Deployer of covered ADMT

    Provide the statute's applicable notices/disclosures and consumer correction, human-review, and reconsideration process after an adverse consequential decision.

    Date / deadline: 2027-01-01

    SB26-189 §§6-1-1704-1705; §5

  • Colorado Attorney General

    Adopt rules clarifying specified disclosure and consumer-rights requirements.

    Date / deadline: 2027-01-01

    SB26-189 §§6-1-1704(4), 6-1-1705(3); §5

What would need to be proven?

The following mappings are analysis. Candidate evidence is not proof that a vendor satisfies an obligation, and hardware attestation alone does not establish legal compliance.

Claim to examine
A developer/deployer supplied required documents and notices for a covered ADMT consequential decision.
Candidate evidence
Scope assessment, developer documentation, notices, adverse-outcome records, correction/review requests, and rulemaking record.
Possible approach
Map evidence to definitions, exemptions, effective date, and cited provisions.
Assumptions
  • Use is covered ADMT materially influencing a consequential decision and no exemption controls.
Limits and open questions
  • Does not resolve interim 2026 regime, agency rules, or liability.

Original sources

  • Colorado SB26-189 bill page

    status and bill summary

    Published: 2026-05-14 · Retrieved: 2026-10-31T07:30:18.124533+00:00

    Retrieval method: automated fetch

  • Colorado SB26-189 signed act

    §§6-1-1702, 6-1-1705, 6-1-1706; §5

    Published: 2026-05-14 · Retrieved: 2026-10-31T03:22:56.672580+00:00

    Manual source audit: 2026-10-31T03:24:41Z

    Retrieval method: manual source audit

    • The signed act repeals and reenacts Part 17 and provides that most provisions take effect 1 January 2027.
    • The cited provisions concern documentation, notices, consumer correction/review, and Attorney General rulemaking for covered ADMT consequential decisions.

    Audit limit: Manual primary-PDF audit only; threshold and exemption analysis remains fact- and text-specific.

Observation history

This is Bill Commons’ retained observation history, not a complete history of the instrument. A changed source body requires review before its policy meaning is updated.

  1. 2026-10-31T03:24:41Z · registry record created

    Curated registry entry created; this is not a source retrieval.

  2. 2026-10-31T07:30:18.124533+00:00 · source check

    Source fetch outcome; body changes require human review and do not assert a policy change.