Arizona HB 2311 — Bill Text (Senate Engrossed with Farnsworth Floor Amendment #2, 2026)

This page summarizes the text of Arizona House Bill 2311, "artificial intelligence service; disclosures; requirements," of the Fifty-seventh Legislature, Second Regular Session (2026), whose prime sponsor was Rep. Tony Rivero. The bill would have added a new chapter 8, "Artificial Intelligence," to title 18 of the Arizona Revised Statutes, consisting of a definitions section (§ 18-801) and a single operative section (§ 18-802) imposing disclosure, content, minor-protection, crisis-protocol, age-assurance privacy and reporting duties on operators of conversational AI services, enforceable only by the attorney general. The raw file carries two documents: the Senate Engrossed version of June 11, 2026, reproduced in full, and the second floor amendment offered by Sen. David C. Farnsworth in the Additional Committee of the Whole and adopted the same day with reference to that engrossed bill. Taken together they are the text the Legislature passed; Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed it on June 19, 2026 (HB 2311 Veto Letter — Gov. Katie Hobbs (Arizona, June 19, 2026)). The bill was not enacted.

Which text was vetoed

The version the Legislature posted as the "Senate Engrossed Version (06/11/2026)" does not incorporate the second Farnsworth floor amendment, which was adopted the same day and drafted with reference to the Senate engrossed bill. The Legislature published no later engrossed or enrolled version. The text transmitted to the Governor is therefore the engrossed text as changed by the amendment. The amendment reprints the whole bill "as proposed to be amended"; the raw file reproduces its explanation and the three amended passages verbatim and records that every other passage is identical to the engrossed text. The amendment directs "Enroll and engross to conform" and "Amend title to conform."

The amendment's explanation, dated June 11, 2026 and prepared by Kaytie Sherman, lists four changes: operators may not condition access to a conversational AI service on the use of an age-verification digital identification system unless federal law expressly requires it; the rule of construction on tracking bars a system that tracks "any, rather than all" of an account holder's online activity; the chapter may not be used to create or enforce a social scoring or social credit system; and technical changes. In the reprinted passages, the technical change is the substitution of "may" for "do" in the last sentence of subsection E.

Definitions (§ 18-801)

Section 18-801 defines ten terms.

• Conversational AI service means an artificial intelligence software application, web interface or computer program that is accessible to the general public and that primarily simulates human conversation and interaction through textual, visual or aural communications. It excludes a product that (i) is primarily designed and marketed for use by developers or researchers; (ii) is a feature within another application, web interface or program that is not itself a conversational AI service; (iii) is designed to provide outputs relating to a narrow and discrete topic; (iv) is primarily designed and marketed for commercial use by business entities; (v) incorporates a speaker and voice command interface or a text interface and acts as a text-activated or voice-activated virtual assistant for a consumer electronic device; (vi) is used by a business entity solely for internal purposes; (vii) is used by a business entity solely for customer service or to provide information about its own commercial services or products, customer service account information or other information strictly related to its customer service; (viii) is used by a state or local government agency solely for the equivalent customer-service purposes; or (ix) is used solely to provide commerce-related or transactional assistance, including product or service recommendations, shopping, ordering, payments, delivery, returns or customer support.
• Operator means a person that makes a conversational AI service available to the public; it does not include a mobile application store or search engine solely because it provides access to such a service. Person means a natural person or legal entity; individual means a natural person.
• Account holder means an individual who has, or opens, an account or profile to use a conversational AI service. Minor means an individual under circumstances in which an operator has "actual knowledge or reasonable certainty" that the individual is under eighteen; a minor account holder is an account holder who is a minor.
• Age-assurance method means any technical or administrative mechanism used solely to determine whether an account holder is a minor.
• Digital identification system means a process that uses government-issued identification, facial recognition, facial age-estimation or age-classification technology, biometrics or another uniquely identifying credential to authenticate an account holder's real-world identity or estimate an account holder's age.
• Sexual conduct takes its meaning from A.R.S. § 13-3551.

Duties of operators (§ 18-802(A)–(G))

Disclosure (A)

Each operator must clearly and conspicuously disclose to each account holder that the account holder is interacting with a conversational AI service, either as a persistent visible disclaimer or at the beginning of each session and at least every three hours in a continuous interaction.

Engagement rewards (B)

An operator that knows an account holder is a minor may not provide points or similar rewards at unpredictable intervals with the intent to encourage increased engagement with the service.

Sexual content, all account holders (C)

Each operator must institute reasonable measures to prevent the service from producing visual material of sexual conduct, generating direct statements that the account holder should engage in sexual conduct, or generating statements that sexually objectify the account holder.

Human-likeness, minor account holders (D)

For minor account holders, the operator must institute reasonable measures to prevent the service from generating statements that would lead a reasonable person to believe they are interacting with a human, including explicit claims that the service is sentient or human, statements that simulate emotional dependence, statements that simulate romantic or sexual innuendos, and role-playing of adult–minor romantic relationships.

Account tools (E)

Each operator must offer tools for minor account holders, and for the parent or guardian of an account holder under thirteen, to manage privacy and account settings, and must offer related tools to the parent or guardian of a minor account holder aged thirteen or older "as appropriate based on relevant risks." The tools may be local to the device or account and, as amended, may not require a digital identification system.

Suicide and self-harm (F)

Each operator must adopt a protocol for responding to a user prompt regarding suicidal ideation or self-harm, including reasonable efforts to refer the account holder to crisis service providers such as a suicide hotline or crisis text line, and must institute reasonable measures to prevent the service from generating statements that encourage or instruct an account holder to commit suicide or self-harm or that glorify suicide or self-harm.

Professional health-care representations (G)

An operator may not knowingly and intentionally cause or program the service to make a representation or statement that explicitly indicates it is designed to provide professional mental or behavioral health care.

Age assurance and data protection (§ 18-802(H)–(L))

Digital identification (H)

Unless federal law expressly requires it, an operator may not condition access on the use of a digital identification system for age verification (as amended). An operator that voluntarily offers such a system must make available a privacy-preserving alternative that provides equivalent access. An age-assurance method may collect only the minimum data reasonably necessary; the data may not be repurposed for advertising, profiling or unrelated analytics and must be deleted or irreversibly de-identified after the compliance purpose is satisfied. The subsection does not require account creation or prohibit anonymous or pseudonymous use.

Safeguards and secondary use (I)

An operator must implement reasonable safeguards for personal or age-related data collected solely for compliance with the section and must give security-breach notification as prescribed in A.R.S. § 18-552. Such data may not be used, sold or shared for targeted advertising, behavioral profiling or any secondary monetization.

Government access (J–K)

A governmental entity may not compel disclosure of that data except pursuant to a warrant issued by a court of competent jurisdiction on a showing of probable cause. An operator receiving such a warrant must notify the affected account holder within seventy-two hours after disclosure unless the court order specifically prohibits notification. An operator may not transfer, license or make available to a governmental entity any data, model, analytics or profile derived from compliance with the section, directly or through a third-party intermediary, except as required by such a warrant.

Annual certification and report (L)

On or before April 1 of each year, an operator that collects personal or age-related data for compliance must certify in writing, under penalty of perjury, that all of it was destroyed or irreversibly de-identified within the period subsection H requires; and every operator must publish a publicly accessible aggregate report identifying the age-assurance methods it uses, whether a digital identification system is offered and whether alternative methods are available.

Remedies and enforcement (§ 18-802(M)–(N))

An operator that violates "this chapter" is subject to an injunction and liable for the greater of actual damages or civil penalties of $1,000 per violation, not to exceed $500,000 per operator (M). A violation of "this section" is punishable by a civil penalty "to be sought by the attorney general only." The section "does not create a private right of action to enforce this section or to support a private right of action under any other law." The attorney general "may not adopt a rule or any guidance or enforcement action or enter into a settlement agreement that expands a requirement" beyond those expressly included in the section, "including a requirement for identity verification or bulk data reporting" (N).

Idaho's Conversational AI Safety Act (SB 1297) and Nebraska's LB525, both enacted in 2026, use the same $1,000-per-violation and $500,000-per-operator figures, reserve enforcement to the attorney general and exclude a private right of action (Source: Raw Sources/Idaho Conversational AI Safety Act (SB 1297).md; Raw Sources/Nebraska Conversational AI Safety Act (LB525).md).

Rules of construction (§ 18-802(O))

The section:

1. does not create liability for the developer of an AI model for a violation by a conversational AI service that a third-party operator makes available to the public;
2. is to be construed in the least intrusive manner consistent with article II, section 8 of the Arizona Constitution, and may not be used to implement a system that tracks any (engrossed text: "all") of an account holder's online activity;
3. does not authorize the regulation of lawful political, religious or other protected speech;
4. may not be cited or used as a predicate or justification to require digital identification for general internet access, device access or online activity unrelated to a conversational AI service;
5. may not be construed to require or authorize an operating-system provider, application store, internet service provider or device manufacturer to implement an age-assurance method or identity authentication at the device, operating-system or network level on behalf of an operator; and
6. (added by amendment #2) may not be cited or used to create or enforce a social scoring system, a social credit system or any system that rates, ranks or restricts access to a service based on an individual's behaviors, expressions or associations, whether or not related to a conversational AI service.

Effective date

Section 2 of the bill would have made the new chapter effective "from and after September 30, 2027."

Veto

Governor Hobbs's letter of June 19, 2026 objects to the bill's remedies rather than its duties: it states that the bill limits damages to families, "prohibits families from bringing their own lawsuits," and "ties the state's hands in bringing actions in an unprecedented manner." These objections correspond to subsections M and N. The letter does not address the disclosure, content, minor-protection, crisis-protocol or age-assurance provisions (HB 2311 Veto Letter — Gov. Katie Hobbs (Arizona, June 19, 2026)).

Provenance

Part 1 of the raw file is transcribed from the HTML rendering of the Senate Engrossed version at azleg.gov (PDF at HB2311S.pdf), enacting clause through Sec. 2, with capitalized text marking new statutory language as in the original. Part 2 reproduces the explanation and amended passages of the Farnsworth floor amendment #2 PDF at apps.azleg.gov. In that PDF added and struck text are both set in brackets distinguished by underline or strikeout, which the text layer does not preserve; the direction of each change is taken from the amendment's own explanation. The bill-status record (BillId 84047) lists the three versions (Introduced, House Engrossed of February 24, 2026, and Senate Engrossed of June 11, 2026), both adopted Senate floor amendments, the votes and the Governor's action "Vetoed" on June 19, 2026 (Source: apps.azleg.gov). Earlier versions are at HB2311P.htm (introduced) and HB2311H.htm (House engrossed) and are not part of the raw file.

Relationships

• instance-of: Arizona HB 2311 (artificial intelligence service; disclosures; requirements) — the bill whose text this is; legislative history, comparison and reactions live there
• supports: HB 2311 Veto Letter — Gov. Katie Hobbs (Arizona, June 19, 2026) — the provisions (M) and (N) to which the veto letter's three objections correspond
• related: Colorado HB 26-1263 (Chatbot Safety Act) — Colorado's Chatbot Safety Act, with a near-identical core definition of a conversational AI service
• related: Idaho SB 1297 — Conversational AI Safety Act, Nebraska LB525 — Conversational AI Safety Act + Agricultural Data Privacy Act — enacted statutes with the same $1,000 / $500,000 penalty structure and attorney-general-only enforcement
• related: California SB 243 — Companion Chatbots — California companion-chatbot law with a private right of action
• instance-of: AI Companions — regulation of services that simulate human conversation
• related: Age Verification — subsections H–L and O(4)–(5) on digital identification and age-assurance data
• related: AI Liability — remedies, the private-right-of-action bar and the developer carve-out
• related: AI Transparency — the AI-identity disclosure duty in subsection A
• related: AI Mental Health and Psychological Harm — the suicide and self-harm protocol and health-care representation bar
• related: AI and Children, State-Level AI Regulation
• related: Katie Hobbs — vetoed the bill