ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE INTERACTION PRIVACY AND CIVIL PROTECTION ACT

This bill establishes that individual interactions with artificial intelligence (AI) systems constitute protected personal information and private communications under California law and creates a civil cause of action for misuse or violation of those protections.

The bill explicitly extends California’s constitutional right to privacy and consumer privacy framework to a rapidly emerging category of digital activity: AI-mediated thinking, drafting, inquiry, and exploration.

As AI systems increasingly function as private notebooks, tutors, research assistants, and cognitive tools, Californians are using them to ask unfinished, controversial, speculative, or exploratory questions. This legislation draws a firm legal boundary between thought formation and conduct, rejecting the growing practice of treating AI interactions as evidence of intent, character, or fitness.

This proposal is deliberately controversial because it challenges a powerful incentive: using AI chat logs as a shortcut for judgment.

Example/Problem Description

EXAMPLES • Consumers use AI systems to explore sensitive, controversial, speculative, or hypothetical topics and later discover those interactions were accessed, disclosed, or repurposed without consent. • Employers or prospective employers demand access to an applicant’s AI interaction history and rely on exploratory prompts or draft AI-generated content to deny employment, promotion, or advancement. • Professional licensing or credentialing boards review AI-generated drafts created during exam preparation, career exploration, or hypothetical inquiry and treat that material as evidence of intent, risk, or professional fitness. • Civil litigants subpoena AI interaction logs—such as prompts, drafts, or exploratory questions—to argue state of mind, motive, predisposition, or character in unrelated disputes. • Administrative or regulatory agencies rely on AI-assisted notes, drafts, or exploratory materials created for internal thinking purposes as evidence of regulatory noncompliance. • Educational institutions, contractors, or evaluators assess students or applicants based on AI-mediated exploratory content rather than demonstrated conduct or performance.

Bill Impact

Solutions

• Define AI Interaction Data as protected personal information and private communications under California law. • Prohibit evidentiary, evaluative, or decision-making misuse of AI Interaction Data absent express consent or narrowly tailored judicial authorization. • Create a civil cause of action allowing affected individuals to recover statutory damages. • Preserve limited judicial authorization pathways to ensure lawful investigations and due process remain intact.

Possible Support

American Civil Liberties Union of California • Electronic Frontier Foundation • Consumer Federation of California • California privacy and civil liberties organizations • Academic technology law and policy centers (UC Berkeley, Stanford, UCLA)

Possible Opposition

• California Chamber of Commerce • California Employers Association • California District Attorneys Association • Certain state regulatory and licensing boards • Industry groups concerned about expanded civil liability or discovery limits

Arguments In Support

• Reinforces California’s constitutional right to privacy in modern digital environments used for thinking and learning. • Prevents speculative AI content from being misused as evidence of intent or character. • Provides legal clarity for consumers, employers, courts, and regulators. • Encourages responsible AI adoption by reducing chilling effects on lawful inquiry.

Arguments In Opposition

• May limit certain undefined discovery practices or litigation strategies. • Introduces compliance and liability considerations for employers and agencies. • Critics may argue courts already possess sufficient discretion without statutory guidance.

Why This Is Not A Shield For Criminals

This Act preserves all lawful criminal investigative tools, including warrants, subpoenas, and court-authorized discovery. It restricts only the misuse of speculative or exploratory AI Interaction Data as a substitute for evidence of conduct or intent. The bill protects thinking, not wrongdoing—consistent with California’s long-standing protection of drafts, notes, and pre-decisional communications.

Budget Impact

Minimal. Civil enforcement relies on existing judicial infrastructure. No new agencies, programs, or enforcement bodies are created.

Section(s) Impacted

SECTIONS IMPACTED As determined by Legislative Counsel, this bill may amend or add provisions within: • California Constitution, Article I, Section 1 • California Civil Code • California Evidence Code • California Labor Code • California Business and Professions Code