California 2025-2026 Regular Session

California Assembly Bill AB1018

Introduced
2/20/25  
Refer
3/10/25  
Report Pass
4/10/25  
Refer
4/21/25  
Report Pass
4/23/25  
Refer
4/23/25  
Report Pass
4/30/25  
Refer
5/5/25  
Refer
5/14/25  
Report Pass
5/23/25  
Engrossed
6/2/25  
Refer
6/3/25  
Refer
6/11/25  
Report Pass
7/3/25  
Refer
7/3/25  
Report Pass
7/16/25  

Caption

Automated decision systems.

Impact

If enacted, AB 1018 will establish a framework for the oversight of AIS utilized by state agencies, mandating yearly performance assessments and third-party audits. Beginning January 1, 2027, deployers of ADS must provide affected individuals with opportunities to opt-out of the technology's use and allow for appeals against decisions made by these systems. The bill reserves certain documents from public disclosure to protect proprietary information, suggesting a balance between public oversight and protecting business interests.

Summary

Assembly Bill 1018, introduced by Assembly Member Bauer-Kahan, aims to regulate the development and deployment of Automated Decision Systems (ADS) within California. The bill defines ADS as a computational process that utilizes machine learning, statistical modeling, or artificial intelligence to assist or replace human decision-making in ways that significantly affect individuals. Under this bill, developers of ADS are required to conduct performance evaluations and disclose evaluation results to users, ensuring transparency and accountability in the deployment of AI technologies.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding AB 1018 is largely positive among proponents who view it as a necessary step towards addressing the ethical implications of AI in decision-making. Advocates argue that it promotes fairness and protects individuals' rights. However, concerns have been raised about potential negative impacts on innovation and the burden of compliance on developers and deployers, sparking debate about the appropriate level of regulation in this rapidly advancing field.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the bill's provisions regarding the confidentiality of performance evaluations, which some argue may hinder transparency. Also, some stakeholders are concerned about the compliance costs and the practicality of the mandated procedures which can be particularly burdensome for smaller developers. These discussions reflect the broader debate on how to effectively regulate emerging technologies without stifling innovation.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Previously Filed As

CA AB2930

Automated decision systems.

CA AB331

Automated decision tools.

CA SB892

Public contracts: automated decision systems: procurement standards.

CA AB302

Department of Technology: high-risk automated decision systems: inventory.

CA SB896

Generative Artificial Intelligence Accountability Act.

CA AB2885

Artificial intelligence.

CA SB1220

Public benefits contracts: phone operator jobs.

CA AB2877

California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018: artificial intelligence: training.

CA SB942

California AI Transparency Act.

CA SB1047

Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier Artificial Intelligence Models Act.

Similar Bills

CA AB2930

Automated decision systems.

VT H0340

An act relating to regulating developers and deployers of certain automated decision systems

VA HB2094

High-risk artificial intelligence; definitions, development, deployment, and use, civil penalties.

CA AB331

Automated decision tools.

GA SB167

Commerce and Trade; private entities that employ certain AI systems to guard against discrimination caused by such systems; provide