The European Commission has launched a six-week public consultation on implementing rules for high-risk AI systems under the EU AI Act. Amid the discussions are debates over compliance burdens, requests from American tech giants to simplify the code, worries over European innovation competitiveness, and expert concerns about transparency and downstream obligations for high-risk AI applications.

Tech and music leaders urged Congress to pass the No Fakes Act, a bipartisan bill protecting Americans from AI-generated deepfakes that steal voices and likenesses. The proposed law would build upon the Take It Down Act, creating federal safeguards, holding platforms accountable, and empowering victims to remove unauthorized digital replicas quickly, addressing urgent privacy and creative rights concerns.

In February of 2024, a teenager shot himself after months of conversation with a chatbot whose last message asked him to “come home to me as soon as possible.” A federal judge has just rejected AI firm Character.AI’s claim that its chatbot’s outputs are protected free speech, allowing a wrongful death lawsuit to proceed. The case will likely set a major precedent for AI liability and regulation as technology outpaces legal safeguards.

The Chicago Sun-Times and Philadelphia Inquirer syndicated a 50-page AI-generated "summer guide" filled with fake books, dubious tips, and non-existent individuals, exposing systemic editorial failures. The freelancer behind “Heat Index” admitted using unchecked AI content from King Features, highlighting journalism's crisis as financial strains and AI "slop" erode trust in legacy media. While a benign slip-up, this incident indicates the problematic AI future we could be heading towards.

As AI integration accelerates, state attorneys general leverage existing privacy, consumer protection, and anti-discrimination laws to address AI risks like deepfakes, bias, and fraud. California, Massachusetts, Oregon, New Jersey, and Texas lead enforcement, signaling heightened scrutiny for businesses deploying AI systems without robust compliance safeguards.

The viral “AI Barbie” trend, where users create Barbie-themed AI images, raises thorny legal issues from copyright and trademark infringement to data privacy and regulatory uncertainty. As generative AI collides with pop culture, creators and developers must navigate a shifting legal landscape to avoid infringing on intellectual property and exposing themselves and others to cybersecurity risks.

Legal experts and judges agree that AI can help process information and streamline judicial tasks, but it lacks the reasoning, empathy, and moral judgment needed for true adjudication. While courts experiment with AI in administrative roles, the consensus is that human judges remain essential, at least for now.

A federal judicial panel has advanced a draft rule to regulate AI-generated evidence in court, seeking public input to ensure such evidence meets reliability standards. The move reflects growing pressure for regulations to keep pace with the judiciary’s need to adapt to rapid technological change, balanced with concern about the trustworthiness of machine-generated information.

The California State Bar faces scrutiny after using AI to generate bar exam questions, leading to widespread criticism. Issues regarding conflict of interest, questionable test writing, and the viability of online testing have arisen amidst a financial crisis. The California State Bar faces lawsuits and an audit, highlighting the risks and accountability challenges as legal institutions experiment with AI in high-stakes, high-impact settings.

President Trump’s latest executive order pushes AI education nationwide, prioritizing AI in federal grant programs and establishing a White House task force. While questions remain about how schools should responsibly adopt AI into the classroom, the order sets the stage for new legal frameworks and public-private partnerships in AI policy and compliance.

In a historic move, the U.S. House and Senate passed the Take It Down Act, the nation’s first major law directly addressing AI-induced harms such as deepfakes. The bipartisan bill garnered support from tech companies like Meta and Snapchat and aims to give victims of malicious AI-generated content a legal path to demand removal and seek damages. Despite concerns over its enforceability and potential for abuse, this landmark bill signals a new era for AI accountability.

The U.S. Office of Management and Budget recently released sweeping new guidelines for how federal agencies buy and use AI, aiming to spur innovation and cut red tape. These policies could ripple out to the private sector, reshaping how companies approach responsible AI governance and compliance.

China’s embrace of open-source AI is potentially vulnerable as regulatory pressures mount. Once seen as a pathway to innovation, the approach could face government scrutiny that could stifle development. Will China’s AI ambitions clash with its tightening controls? Discover how shifting policies may reshape the nation’s and the world’s AI landscape.

The Tony Blair Institute's recent report advocates for the UK to relax copyright laws, enabling AI firms to utilize protected materials without explicit permission. This proposal has ignited backlash from the creative industry, which fears potential exploitation and economic harm. Governments must decide whether to prioritize advancement in the stiffly competitive AI race or the protection of creative works by human authors.

A U.S. District Court judge allowed The New York Times' lawsuit alleging copyright infringement by OpenAI and Microsoft to proceed, marking a significant moment in the intersection of AI and intellectual property law. The eventual final ruling is likely to draw upon the U.S. Copyright Office's Report on Copyright and Artificial Intelligence and hinge upon the nature of machine learning used by OpenAI.

The Trump administration received numerous comments in response to its Request for Information (RFI) for the development of an AI Action Plan. The comments highlight stakeholders' priorities on AI policies and reflect debates over copyrighted information for AI model training, federal preemption of state AI laws, and export controls. The AI Action Plan is expected to be announced by mid-July 2025.

The third draft of the EU's General-Purpose AI Code of Practice faces criticism for inadequately addressing fundamental rights risks. Despite the addition of illegal discrimination, most such risks remain optional, raising concerns about the code's effectiveness in ensuring AI providers mitigate these risks under the EU AI Act.

State legislatures are introducing hundreds of AI bills in 2025, focusing on consumer protection, sector-specific regulations, chatbot transparency, generative AI oversight, data center energy usage, and frontier model safety. These diverse proposals aim to shape the U.S. AI regulatory landscape amid a current absence of federal action and will have implications on business development and consumer interactions.