Illinois Senate Bill SB1366

Illinois 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/29/25
• Refer: 1/29/25

Caption

STATE GOVT AI ACT

Summary

SB1366 creates the State Government AI Act, a new state law framework governing how Illinois agencies may develop, buy, deploy, use, and evaluate artificial intelligence. The bill directs the Department of Innovation and Technology (DoIT) to adopt rules by January 1, 2028, establishing policies and procedures for AI use across state government. Those rules are intended to address AI governance broadly, including procurement and assessment, and DoIT may consult the Generative AI and Natural Language Processing Task Force when developing them. The bill also places a default prohibition on state agency use of AI beginning January 1, 2028, unless the use is specifically allowed under DoIT’s rules. In addition, it requires annual impact assessment reporting: each state agency must report on AI’s impact on the agency by July 1 each year, and DoIT must compile and submit a statewide AI impact report to the Governor and General Assembly by January 1 each year. The act takes effect immediately upon enactment.

Impact

SB1366 would add a new statutory framework for artificial intelligence in Illinois state government and would give the Department of Innovation and Technology primary rulemaking authority over AI governance. It would affect executive-branch and legislative-branch agencies covered by the bill’s broad definition of “agency of State government,” restricting AI deployment unless permitted by rule and imposing recurring reporting obligations on agencies and DoIT. The bill would not regulate private-sector AI use directly, but it would significantly shape state procurement, deployment, and oversight practices for AI systems.

Sentiment

Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee testimony or votes, the measure appears to be framed as a cautious, oversight-oriented response to emerging AI use in government. Its stated purpose is to protect and enhance public health, welfare, and safety, suggesting a policy approach that emphasizes control, review, and accountability rather than rapid adoption. No formal support or opposition is documented in the provided materials, so the overall sentiment cannot be measured from debate history, but the bill itself reflects concern about unmanaged government AI use.

Contention

The main point of potential contention is the bill’s broad prohibition on state agency use of AI unless specifically authorized by DoIT rules, which could be viewed as overly restrictive by agencies seeking to deploy AI tools for efficiency or service delivery. Another likely issue is the breadth of the definitions and the scope of reporting requirements, which may impose administrative burdens on agencies and leave significant discretion to DoIT. Supporters would likely favor the bill’s emphasis on oversight, safety, and transparency, while critics may worry about slowed innovation, uncertainty during the rulemaking period, and centralized control over AI adoption.