Newsom signs six-bill package regulating AI in workplaces and legal practice

California Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed six bills regulating artificial intelligence and other automated technologies in workplaces and legal practice, according to an analysis by law firm Davis Wright Tremaine. The package addresses employment decisions, worker surveillance and displacement, as well as AI use by attorneys and arbitrators and AI-generated likenesses. Most provisions take effect Jan. 1, 2027; the firm says the automated-decision rules have a July 1, 2027 compliance date.

One of the central measures, SB 947, limits employers’ use of automated decision systems in consequential employment decisions. The law bars employers from relying solely on such a system’s output to discipline or terminate a worker. When an employer primarily relies on that output, a human must independently review it and obtain corroborating information; if the result cannot be corroborated or is found to be inaccurate, incomplete or misleading, the employer may not rely on it, the firm says.

The law also requires employers to give workers written notice when a disciplinary or termination decision is primarily based on an automated system, including notice that the system was used, that a human reviewed and corroborated its output, and how to contact a human representative. Workers may request a meaningful description of their own data used by the system. The law restricts use of these tools to infer protected status or to target workers for exercising legal rights, and provides for enforcement by the Labor Commissioner and public prosecutors.

A separate bill, SB 951, adds disclosure requirements to existing California mass-layoff notices when AI or other automation causes a layoff, relocation or termination in whole or substantial part. Notices must identify affected workers’ job classifications and locations, the job functions to be automated and the type of technology involved, and must carry the heading “This notice is for a technology displacement.” Existing notice thresholds and timing rules remain in place, the firm says.

Two other bills focus on monitoring workers. AB 1331 bars surveillance tools in designated private spaces, including bathrooms, changing areas and breakrooms, and requires that tools be turned off during off-duty hours, including meal and rest breaks. Monitoring an employee’s home, personal vehicle or property is permitted only when strictly necessary. AB 1883 separately prohibits AI-powered workplace surveillance tools that recognize or infer emotional states or collect neural data, which the law defines as information generated by measuring nervous-system activity.

The package also sets rules for lawyers and arbitrators using generative AI. Under SB 574, attorneys must take reasonable steps to verify AI output, including checking citations, and may not submit a court citation they have not personally checked. The bill requires disclosure of generative AI use in court documents. Arbitrators may not delegate decision-making to generative AI or rely on AI-generated information from outside the case record without notifying the parties and, where practical, giving them an opportunity to comment.

The sixth measure, SB 1111, addresses digital replicas. The firm says it clarifies that “voice or likeness” under California law includes an AI-generated digital replica and requires prior consent for covered uses. The source describes the measure as part of the broader package but does not provide a full account of its provisions.

The firm recommends that California employers review their automated decision systems, surveillance tools and related policies before the laws take effect, and check whether vendors’ products include prohibited monitoring features. The practical reach of the package will depend on the details of the laws and how they are enforced; the firm’s account notes that some exceptions apply, including limited federal aerospace and defense exemptions.