August 31–September 6, 2026

September 8 editorial update. Following additional research, we located two additional bills presented to the Governor last week: AB 1979, addressing AI clinical decision support and health-care chatbots, and AB 2392, establishing GenAI procurement and training standards for California’s public higher-education systems. We apologize for the omission. Transparency is a core editorial commitment of the California AI Law Reporter.

AI governance measures complete legislative action

On August 31, lawmakers completed action on several consequential AI measures. SB 574 would regulate generative-AI use in legal practice and arbitration. AB 1609 would require covered large businesses to identify customer-service chatbots in specified circumstances and provide a route to a human representative.

SB 1119 would establish child-safety assessments and independent audits for companion chatbots, while SB 867 would temporarily prohibit toys designed for children under 16 from incorporating companion chatbots. These measures completed legislative action but had not been chaptered by the September 6 cutoff.

SB 1000 reaches the Governor

SB 1000, the previously reported AI-transparency measure, was formally presented to the Governor on September 2. Presentation is not enactment: as of the reporting cutoff, the measure had not been signed, chaptered, or made law.

Health care and higher-education AI bills reach the Governor

AB 1979 was presented to the Governor on September 4. The bill would require licensed health-care professionals to retain independent professional judgment when patient care is informed by clinical decision-support output, prohibit AI from independently performing clinical functions reserved by law for licensed professionals, and treat qualifying health-care chatbot businesses as health-care providers for purposes of California medical-information confidentiality requirements.

AB 2392 was presented to the Governor on September 3. It would require the California Community Colleges and California State University—and request the University of California—to develop GenAI procurement standards and training, maintain training records, and report specified systemwide GenAI contracts until procurement standards are adopted.

Employment measures clear the Legislature

SB 947 received Senate concurrence on August 31. If enacted, it would prohibit sole reliance on an automated decision system for discipline or termination and require human corroboration when such a system is the primary basis for the decision.

SB 951 also received final passage. It would add AI- and automation-related information to certain Cal/WARN notices and require statewide reporting by the Employment Development Department. The current text does not contain the previously reported “90 days/25%” thresholds.

AB 1331 completed legislative action after the Senate passed it and the Assembly concurred on August 31. The measure would restrict workplace-surveillance technology generally, including monitoring in bathrooms, and authorize civil enforcement; it is not limited to AI systems.

No qualifying new agency action or published opinion

No consequential California agency AI action could be verified within the coverage period. The CDT generative-AI risk-assessment materials identified during research were issued in October 2025 and were excluded as outside the window.

No new published California or Ninth Circuit decision met the verification and materiality threshold. The Northern District of California filing index recorded two new matters, but the complaints were not summarized because they could not be reviewed through the court’s public index.

Why it matters

The reporting focus now shifts from legislative procedure to the Governor’s sign-or-veto decisions. Until a measure is signed and chaptered, its proposed requirements should not be described as current California law.

Informational only; not legal advice.