🔴Illinois HB 3773IN EFFECTUp to ~$70K/violation|🔴Texas TRAIGA (HB 149)IN EFFECTAG-enforced|🔴Utah AI Policy ActIN EFFECT$2,500/violation|⚠️Colorado AI Act (SB 205)Jan 1, 2027AG-enforced|⚠️California SB 942Aug 2, 2026$5K/day|⚠️EU AI Act Art. 50Aug 2, 2026€35M or 7% revenue|⚠️New York RAISE ActJan 1, 2027AG civil penalties|🔴Illinois HB 3773IN EFFECTUp to ~$70K/violation|🔴Texas TRAIGA (HB 149)IN EFFECTAG-enforced|🔴Utah AI Policy ActIN EFFECT$2,500/violation|⚠️Colorado AI Act (SB 205)Jan 1, 2027AG-enforced|⚠️California SB 942Aug 2, 2026$5K/day|⚠️EU AI Act Art. 50Aug 2, 2026€35M or 7% revenue|⚠️New York RAISE ActJan 1, 2027AG civil penalties|
VetoedDeadline: N/A (vetoed)
Flag of Virginia

AI Laws in Virginia (VA)

HB 2094 would have required high-risk AI developers to implement safeguards against algorithmic discrimination. Governor Youngkin vetoed the bill on March 24, 2025; no dedicated AI law currently in effect.

Map showing the location of Virginia in the United States
Virginia within the United States
⚠️
Maximum penalty: N/A (vetoed)
Non-compliance can result in significant fines for your business

What HB 2094 requires

Virginia has enacted HB 2094 — High-Risk AI Developer and Deployer Act (vetoed 2025-03-24). HB 2094 would have required high-risk AI developers to implement safeguards against algorithmic discrimination. Governor Youngkin vetoed the bill on March 24, 2025; no dedicated AI law currently in effect. This page explains what the law requires in plain language, who is in scope, the penalty for non-compliance, and what your business needs to do before the N/A (vetoed) deadline.

Who is in scope

The law covers developers who build AI systems classified as high-risk — typically systems that influence consequential decisions in credit, employment, healthcare, education, housing, or government services — and the companies that deploy them, and any operator deploying AI systems that interact with consumers, influence decision-making, or could produce discriminatory outcomes in housing, credit, employment, or public accommodations. Company size does not determine whether you are in scope — a startup with ten employees using an off-the-shelf AI hiring tool has the same disclosure obligations as an enterprise running a custom-built model. What matters is whether the AI system makes or substantially informs a decision that affects a Virginia resident in a consequential way. Notably, the obligation extends to vendors: if your company deploys an AI tool built by a third party, you — as the deployer — are responsible for ensuring it meets Virginia's requirements, even if you did not build it.

Key compliance requirements

Virginia's risk-assessment framework requires that developers and deployers of high-impact AI systems conduct formal impact assessments before deployment and re-evaluate them when the system changes materially. An impact assessment must document the intended purpose of the system, the data it uses, the populations it affects, known accuracy limitations, and what bias-testing was performed. Deployers must also publish a summary of the assessment that is accessible to consumers and regulators — internal documentation alone is insufficient. Critically, the assessment is not a one-time exercise: Virginia's law contemplates ongoing monitoring, with a duty to update documentation when performance data or demographic outputs shift.

Virginia's law specifically targets AI systems designed to manipulate human behavior or produce discriminatory outcomes. A system is considered manipulative if it exploits psychological biases, creates false urgency, or targets vulnerable populations in ways that undermine informed consent. The anti-discrimination provisions extend existing civil-rights frameworks into AI: companies cannot deploy AI that produces disparate outcomes in protected categories even if no discriminatory intent existed. This requires testing AI outputs across demographic groups before deployment and building ongoing monitoring into the operational pipeline.

Penalties for non-compliance

The financial consequences of non-compliance under HB 2094 are real and enforceable now. Virginia sets a maximum civil penalty of N/A (vetoed). Penalties accumulate per violation — meaning a company that has deployed an AI tool to thousands of consumers without required disclosures faces compounding exposure, not a single capped fine. Consumer AI violations in Virginia may also attract federal coordination: the FTC's Operation AI Comply sweep (September 2024) demonstrated that state and federal enforcers share intelligence on companies with widespread AI disclosure failures.

What to do now

Build your AI inventory first. You cannot comply with Virginia's requirements if you do not know which systems are in scope. Map every AI or automated decision system your company uses that touches Virginia residents — including third-party vendor tools integrated into your product.

Draft accurate disclosure language. Work with legal counsel to produce disclosure statements that accurately describe what your AI does, what data it uses, and what the consumer can do if they want human review. Vague or boilerplate disclosures will not satisfy Virginia's requirements.

Build the opt-out pathway. Implement a functioning process for consumers to request human review or opt out of AI-assisted processing. Test it before the deadline — regulators will look for live, working mechanisms, not documented promises.

Complete impact assessments for high-risk systems. Follow the framework in HB 2094 to produce a written assessment covering intended use, training data, affected populations, accuracy benchmarks, and bias mitigation. Retain the documentation for at least the period specified in the law's record-keeping provisions.

Assign a compliance owner. Designate someone — legal counsel, a privacy officer, or a dedicated AI governance lead — to track regulatory developments, own the audit documentation, and respond if an enforcement inquiry arrives. The compliance deadline is N/A (vetoed). Don't wait until the deadline to start.

Virginia AI law in the broader regulatory landscape

Virginia's law does not exist in isolation. The trend across the United States is toward more regulation, not less: at least 20 states enacted or proposed AI-specific legislation in 2025 alone, and federal enforcement agencies — the FTC, EEOC, CFPB, and HHS — have all issued guidance making clear that existing laws apply to AI systems even where no AI-specific statute exists. Companies doing business across state lines must track each state's requirements independently — there is no federal preemption that would allow a company to satisfy Virginia's law and automatically comply with requirements in Illinois, Colorado, or New York.

✓ Free · No email · 2 minutes
Does your Virginia business comply with AI laws?
Answer 4 quick questions → get your personalized risk score + action list.
Check My Risk — Free →
● Live

Recent AI law developments in Virginia

Updated July 11, 2026

Recent news coverage of AI regulation and policy in Virginia. Headlines are aggregated automatically; follow each link for the full story.

AI Law NewsFlag of Virginia
13newsnow.com
June 22, 2026
New Virginia law will allow AI cameras to enforce stop sign and crosswalk violations

Coverage from 13newsnow.com on AI legislation and regulation relevant to Virginia.

13newsnow.com·
AI Law NewsFlag of Virginia
13newsnow.com
June 22, 2026
New Virginia law allows AI cameras to enforce stop sign violations

Coverage from 13newsnow.com on AI legislation and regulation relevant to Virginia.

13newsnow.com·
AI Law NewsFlag of Virginia
WAVY.com
June 17, 2026
Virginia law permits AI cameras to enforce traffic rules for pedestrian safety

Coverage from WAVY.com on AI legislation and regulation relevant to Virginia.

WAVY.com·
Live · Legislature

AI bills moving through the Virginia legislature

Updated July 11, 2026

AI-related bills currently tracked in the Virginia legislature, updated automatically from Open States and the state legislature's own official record. Follow each link for the official bill text, sponsors, and status history.

SR 2089Commending the Goshen Post Elementary School Presidential AI Challenge team.

Agreed to by Senate by voice vote (Voice Vote)

Open States·
HR 2201Commending the Goshen Post Elementary School Presidential AI Challenge team.

Agreed to by House by voice vote

Open States·
SB 394Artificial intelligence; use of systems for student instruction.

Department of Education; artificial intelligence system use in instructional settings; development of AIS safety guidance required; AIS Innovation in Education Pilot Program established; report. Requires the Department of Education, in consultation with school divisions and other relevant stakeholders, to compile in…

Approved by Governor-Chapter 943 (effective 7/1/2026)

Open States·
HB 1186Artificial intelligence; use of systems for student instruction.

Department of Education; artificial intelligence system use in instructional settings; development of AIS safety guidance required; AIS Innovation in Education Pilot Program established; report. Requires the Department of Education, in consultation with school divisions and other relevant stakeholders, to compile in…

Approved by Governor-Chapter 937 (effective 7/1/2026)

Open States·
SB 384Artificial intelligence; framework for person/entity acting as an independent verification org.

Joint Commission on Technology and Science; artificial intelligence; independent verification organizations. Directs the Joint Commission on Technology and Science (JCOTS) to evaluate the feasibility and impact of developing a framework for any person or entity seeking to act as an independent verification organizat…

Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0426)

Open States·
HB 797Artificial intelligence; framework for person/entity acting as an independent verification org.

Joint Commission on Technology and Science; artificial intelligence; independent verification organizations. Directs the Joint Commission on Technology and Science (JCOTS) to evaluate the feasibility and impact of developing a framework for any person or entity seeking to act as an independent verification organizat…

Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0425)

Open States·
HJ 32Higher educational institutions; JLARC to study artificial intelligence use policies.

Study; Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission; artificial intelligence use policies in place at institutions of higher education in the Commonwealth; report. Directs the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) to study the artificial intelligence use policies in place at institutions of higher e…

Bill text as passed House and Senate (HJ32ER)

Open States·
SB 796Artificial Intelligence Companion Chatbots and Minors Act; established, enforcement, civil penalty.

Artificial Intelligence Chatbots and Minors Act established; enforcement; civil penalties; individual action. Creates the Artificial Intelligence Chatbots and Minors Act to require a covered entity, defined in the bill, to (i) implement certain reasonable systems and processes, (ii) make reasonable efforts to notify…

Continued to next session in Communications, Technology and Innovation (Voice Vote)

Open States·
SB 269Mental health service providers; definitions, use of artificial intelligence system, civil penalty.

Use of artificial intelligence system by mental health service providers; civil penalty. Permits the use of an artificial intelligence system by mental health service providers to assist in providing therapy or counseling services if such mental health service provider maintains full responsibility for all interacti…

Continued to next session in Communications, Technology and Innovation (Voice Vote)

Open States·
SB 586Health carriers; use of artificial intelligence, disclosures.

Health carriers; use of artificial intelligence; disclosures. Requires health carriers to disclose to the State Corporation Commission's Bureau of Insurance how artificial intelligence is used to manage claims coverage and to submit all information enabling decisions made by artificial intelligence to the Bureau upo…

Continued to next session in Communications, Technology and Innovation (Voice Vote)

Open States·
HB 758Artificial Intelligence Chatbots and Minors Act; established, prohibited practices, penalties.

Artificial Intelligence Chatbots and Minors Act established; prohibited practices; penalties. Creates the Artificial Intelligence Chatbots and Minors Act to require that deployers that operate or distribute a chatbot in the Commonwealth (i) ensure that any chatbot operated or distributed by the deployer does not mak…

Left in Committee Communications, Technology and Innovation

Open States·
HB 1514Employment decisions; automated decision systems, civil penalty.

Employment decisions; automated decision systems; civil penalty. Provides that the Director of the Department of Human Resource Management shall require any state agency that uses an automated decision system as a substantial factor in any employment decision, as those terms are defined in the bill, to (i) ensure th…

Left in Committee Appropriations

Open States·
HB 310Artificial Intelligence Workforce Impact Act; established, report.

Artificial Intelligence Workforce Impact Act established; report. Establishes reporting requirements for each state agency in the Commonwealth relating to the impact of artificial intelligence on the workforce. The bill requires each agency to submit quarterly reports to the Department of Human Resource Management d…

Left in Committee Appropriations

Open States·
HB 668Mental health service providers; use of artificial intelligence system, civil penalty.

Use of artificial intelligence system by mental health service providers; civil penalty. Permits the use of an artificial intelligence system by mental health service providers for administrative support and supplementary support, as those terms are defined in the bill, and prohibits the use of an artificial intelli…

Left in Committee Communications, Technology and Innovation

Open States·
HB 713Fostering Access, Innovation, and Responsibility in Artificial Intelligence Act; established.

Fostering Access, Innovation, and Responsibility in Artificial Intelligence Act established. Establishes the Fostering Access, Innovation, and Responsibility in Artificial Intelligence Act (FAIR AI Act) that requires a developer of a base artificial intelligence model, as defined in the bill, to clearly and conspicu…

Left in Committee Appropriations

Open States·
HB 635Artificial Intelligence Chatbots Act; established, prohibited practices, penalties.

Artificial Intelligence Chatbots Act established; prohibited practices; penalties. Creates the Artificial Intelligence Chatbots Act, which prohibits an operator from making a companion chatbot, as those terms are defined in the bill, available to a user in the Commonwealth unless the companion chatbot is incapable o…

Continued to next session in Communications, Technology and Innovation (Voice Vote)

Open States·
SB 365Fostering Access, Innovation, and Responsibility in Artificial Intelligence Act; established.

Fostering Access, Innovation, and Responsibility in Artificial Intelligence Act established. Establishes the Fostering Access, Innovation, and Responsibility in Artificial Intelligence Act (FAIR AI Act) that requires a developer of a base artificial intelligence model, as defined in the bill, to clearly and conspicu…

Continued to next session in General Laws and Technology (14-Y 0-N 1-A)

Open States·
HB 1294Use of artificial intelligence-based tools; covered artificial intelligence, disclosure of use.

Use of artificial intelligence-based tools; covered artificial intelligence; disclosure of use. Requires the use of covered artificial intelligence, as defined in the bill, in a criminal investigation to be disclosed in a police report filed for that investigation. Such a report shall be submitted to the attorney fo…

Continued to next session in Communications, Technology and Innovation (Voice Vote)

Open States·
HB 1170Law-enforcement agencies & sheriff's dept.; policy on use of covered artificial intelligence syst.

Department of Criminal Justice Services; law-enforcement agencies and sheriff's departments; policy on use of covered artificial intelligence systems. Requires the Department of Criminal Justice Services to establish a model policy for the use of a covered artificial intelligence system, defined in the bill, by any …

Tabled in Communications, Technology and Innovation (21-Y 1-N)

Open States·
HB 2094High-risk artificial intelligence; definitions, development, deployment, and use, civil penalties.

High-risk artificial intelligence; development, deployment, and use; civil penalties. Creates requirements for the development, deployment, and use of high-risk artificial intelligence systems, defined in the bill, and civil penalties for noncompliance, to be enforced by the Attorney General. The bill has a delayed …

House sustained Governor's veto

Open States·
HB 1642Artificial intelligence-based tool; definition, use of tool.

Use of artificial intelligence-based tool. Requires that the recommendations or predictions provided by any artificial intelligence-based tool, as such term is defined in the bill, shall not be the sole basis for any decision related to pre-trial detention or release, prosecution, adjudication, sentencing, probation…

Acts of Assembly Chapter text (CHAP0637)

Open States·
HB 2046High-risk artificial intelligence; development, deployment, and use by public bodies, report.

High-risk artificial intelligence; development, deployment, and use by public bodies; work group; report. Creates requirements for the development, deployment, and use of high-risk artificial intelligence systems, as defined in the bill, by public bodies. The bill also directs the Chief Information Officer of the Co…

Failed to pass

Open States·

Applicable laws

HB 2094 — High-Risk AI Developer and Deployer Act (vetoed 2025-03-24)N/A (vetoed)

↗ Each law links to its primary government source. Full source list below.

Virginia AI compliance by industry

Healthcare
Finance & Banking
HR & Recruiting
Tech & SaaS
Marketing & Advertising
Insurance
Education
Legal Services
Real Estate
Retail & E-Commerce
Manufacturing
Transportation
Media & Entertainment
Nonprofit
Government Contractor

AI compliance by company size

Jump to top-risk sectors for your company size

Startups (1-10)
🏥 Healthcare
Small (11-50)
🏦 Finance
Mid-Market (51-500)
👥 HR & Recruiting
Enterprise (500+)
💻 Tech & SaaS

Quick resources for Virginia

✅ Compliance checklist
💰 Fines & penalties
📋 Requirements
📖 Compliance guide
⏰ Deadlines

Industry risk levels in Virginia

Risk by sector
🏥 HealthcareVery High
🏦 Finance & BankingVery High
💻 Tech & SaaSHigh
🛒 Retail & E-CommerceMedium-High
👔 HR & RecruitingVery High
⚖️ Legal ServicesHigh
📢 Marketing & AdvertisingMedium
🎓 EducationMedium-High
Risk levels based on Virginia AI law requirements and industry-specific regulations

Do you also serve EU customers?

The EU AI Act applies to any company serving EU customers, even if you're based in Virginia. Penalties reach €35M or 7% of global revenue. Deadline: August 2, 2026.

Check EU compliance →·GermanyFranceIreland

Other states with active AI laws

California
$5,000 per violation; each day is a discrete violation
Colorado
AG-enforced (Colorado Consumer Protection Act); up to ~$20,000 per violation
Illinois
IDHR/IHRC make-whole relief + tiered civil penalties up to ~$16,000–$70,000 per act per aggrieved party
Indiana
N/A (state-government governance)
Maine
Enforced as a violation of the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act
Minnesota
Up to $7,500 per violation
Check your state's risk →

Related resources

Free AssessmentHealthcare AI LawsHR & Hiring AI LawsEU AI Act
Editorial standards

Anchored to the primary government source (statute, bill text, or agency rule) and verified directly against it · Last verified Apr 22, 2026. See our methodology.

Primary sources · Virginia