SB 813, formally titled "California Artificial Intelligence Standards and Safety Commission: artificial intelligence safety standards," is a California Senate bill introduced by state Sen. Jerry McNerney (D-Pleasanton) in the 2025–2026 legislative session. The bill would establish the California Artificial Intelligence Standards and Safety Commission, composed of AI industry experts, academics, and public officials, to create voluntary AI safety standards across a range of industries and applications (Source: sd05.senate.ca.gov; Source: leginfo.legislature.ca.gov).
Status and timeline
The bill was heard in the Senate Judiciary Committee on April 29, 2025 and passed the Senate on January 27, 2026 (Source: calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org). On June 17, 2026, McNerney and Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan (D-Orinda), chair of the Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee, announced they were amending SB 813 and Bauer-Kahan's AB 1405 to work in concert with each other, pairing SB 813's standards commission with AB 1405's registry for independent third-party AI auditors (Source: sd05.senate.ca.gov). California lawmakers advanced SB 813 at a July 1, 2026 hearing; technology companies oppose the bill (Source: insideaipolicy.com). The Assembly Privacy and Consumer Protection Committee's vote was 11–2, "do pass as amended," with the bill re-referred to the Assembly Appropriations Committee; the amended version is dated July 2, 2026, and lists Bauer-Kahan and Josh Lowenthal as co-authors (Source: calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org). McNerney called the bill a "critical step in making AI safe and beneficial" (Source: insideaipolicy.com).
As amended July 2, 2026, the bill would require the Business and Consumer Services Agency to establish the commission on or before July 1, 2027; would assign the commission (or, if AB 1709 of the 2025–26 session is enacted, the e-Safety Advisory Commission established under that measure) duties including developing standards for the assessment of AI systems and models by AI auditors, procedures for suspending or terminating an AI auditor's registration, and criteria for determining whether an AI auditor qualifies as an independent verification organization; and would make its operation contingent on the enactment of AB 1405 (Source: calmatters.digitaldemocracy.org).
Key provisions
Under SB 813, the AI Standards and Safety Commission would create voluntary standards for the responsible development of AI and publish them on the commission's website. The commission could designate working groups composed of experts and stakeholders to facilitate the development of what the sponsors describe as practical, evidence-based standards that evolve alongside advances in technology. McNerney's office describes the framework as modeled on standards regimes in other industries, from electrical and mechanical standards to LEED standards for green buildings, and states that under the bill California would become the first state to create voluntary standards for the responsible development of AI (Source: sd05.senate.ca.gov).
Relation to AB 1405
The paired AB 1405 (Bauer-Kahan) would establish a registry and standards for independent third-party AI auditors to verify the safety of AI systems and models, including requirements for auditor independence, ethical practice, and financial independence. As of the June 17, 2026 announcement, AB 1405 sat on the Senate Appropriations Committee's Suspense File, with amendments planned. The sponsors state that both bills need to be enacted for the framework to go into effect (Source: sd05.senate.ca.gov).
Reactions
Gabriel Weil argued on July 29, 2026 that a certification-for-shield design of this kind compounds the developer-pays conflict of interest inherent in the independent-verification-organization model, because a liability shield "swaps the broad incentive to cut risk by any cost-effective means for a narrow incentive to do only what earns the shield" (Don't Let AI Developers Hire Their Own Referees (Weil, July 2026)). His account of the bill differs from the record above in two respects — he describes the accrediting body as the state attorney general rather than a commission, and states the bill "failed this session" — and the discrepancy is unresolved; see the reconciliation note on Independent Verification Organizations (IVOs).
Technology companies oppose SB 813 (Source: insideaipolicy.com). Bauer-Kahan, announcing the pairing, said the bills would build "a system of independent, verified auditors and known standards that protect our communities from AI harms and unchecked power in the hands of a few companies" (Source: sd05.senate.ca.gov).
Relationships
- instance-of: State-Level AI Regulation — a California entry in the state AI-legislation landscape.
- related: Colorado AI Act (SB 24-205) — a contrasting mandatory state framework; the July 2026 FTC policy statement claiming preemption authority over state AI laws singled out Colorado's act.
- related: AI Benchmarks and Evaluation — third-party assessment and verification of AI systems is the subject of the paired AB 1405 registry.