Illinois SB 317 — Consumer Artificial Intelligence Notice Act

Illinois SB 317, the Consumer Artificial Intelligence Notice Act, is a disclosure statute that requires any business using a conversational customer-service AI system in a chat or voice interface to disclose, at the start of an interaction, that the consumer is communicating with an automated system and not a human. It passed the Illinois Senate 57-1 on 2026-05-21 and was sent to the House. It is a disclosure-only measure: it does not regulate model design, training data, accuracy, or outputs, only whether the consumer is told they are talking to a machine.

Status and timeline

SB 317 was rewritten by a Senate floor amendment into the Consumer Artificial Intelligence Notice Act. It passed the Illinois Senate by a vote of 57-1 on 2026-05-21 and was sent to the House, where it received its first reading the same day. (Source: ilga.gov)

Scope and definitions

A conversational customer service artificial intelligence system is defined (§ 5) as a product that uses "artificial intelligence" as defined in Section 2-101 of the Illinois Human Rights Act and engages in real-time, interactive text- or voice-based conversation directly with a consumer through a chat, messaging, or voice interface. The definition excludes internal business operations, marketing, pricing, and analytics activities that do not involve a direct, real-time interaction with the consumer.

The Act defines clear and conspicuous disclosure tightly: it must appear as a separate message at the beginning of the interaction, in the language the consumer is using, and, if written, in at least the same font size and color as the consumer's own messages.

Key provisions

The core obligation (§ 10) is that any business using a conversational customer-service AI system to communicate with a consumer through a chat or voice interface must clearly and conspicuously disclose, at the start of the interaction, that the consumer is communicating with an automated system and not with a human. (Source: ilga.gov)

The exemptions and liability shield (§ 15) confirm that the Act does not reach AI that does not interact directly with consumers, explicitly naming internal analytics, fraud detection, inventory management, pricing, and recommendation systems. The section also provides a liability shield: a business is not liable for the design or outputs of a third-party-developed conversational AI system if the business itself complies with the disclosure requirement.

The home-rule preemption provision (§ 30) declares disclosure of AI use in commercial consumer communications an exclusive function of the State, so that home-rule units such as the City of Chicago may not impose their own disclosure rules. The bill text frames this as a denial and limitation of home-rule powers under the Illinois Constitution, keeping AI-disclosure rules uniform statewide.

Enforcement and penalties

A violation of § 10 is an "unlawful practice" under the Illinois Consumer Fraud and Deceptive Business Practices Act (CFDBPA), via a new Section 2MMMM added to that Act (§ 20, § 25, § 900). Enforcement is by the Illinois Attorney General or a county State's Attorney, who must give at least 7 days' advance notice and accept an assurance of voluntary compliance before suing. A private person who suffers actual damage may bring an action under § 10a of the CFDBPA.

Context and reception

SB 317 belongs to the transparency and consumer-protection strand of US state AI law rather than the frontier-safety strand of SB 53 or Illinois SB 315. It echoes California's earlier "bot disclosure" law (the B.O.T. Act) but targets customer-service chat and voice agents specifically. The bill arrives as conversational customer-service agents become near-indistinguishable from humans, the same capability change behind voice-cloning concerns addressed in the TAKE IT DOWN Act and the NO FAKES Act.

The home-rule clause, in which Illinois preempts its own cities to keep AI-disclosure rules uniform statewide, is a state-level analogue of the state-versus-federal preemption dynamics described in Reverse Federalism. The 57-1 Senate margin indicates that minimal "tell the consumer it's a bot" disclosure drew little legislative opposition, in contrast to more contested forms of AI regulation.

Relationships

• related: Illinois SB 315 (frontier safety framework with mandatory third-party audits) — companion Illinois AI bill (frontier-safety / third-party audits); SB 317 is the consumer-disclosure counterpart.
• related: California SB 53, Colorado AI Act (SB 24-205) — other state AI statutes; SB 317 is narrower (disclosure only).
• related: Synthetic Media / Deepfakes, TAKE IT DOWN Act — adjacent "is this real / is this human" disclosure regime.
• related: Reverse Federalism — state-law convergence and preemption dynamics.

Sources

• (Source: ilga.gov) — SB 317 engrossed bill text (Consumer Artificial Intelligence Notice Act), Illinois General Assembly. Passage and procedural posture per the 2026-05-23 developments log.