Colorado Blinked

America's first broad AI law was signed, delayed, sued, frozen by a federal court, and then repealed. It never spent a single day in force. When Colorado swapped its 2024 AI Act for SB 26-189 this May, plenty of executives breathed a sigh of relief. I think that's a mistake. Colorado didn't lower the bar. It moved it. The old law asked you to prove your process. The new one asks you to justify your outcomes, one person at a time.

I walk through the whole saga:

• the governor signing "with reservations"
• the special-session delay
• xAI's lawsuit, with the U.S. Department of Justice joining on xAI's side
• a federal court freezing the law at the request of both sides, Colorado's own attorney general included
• the rewrite

Then I get into what survived. Starting January 1, 2027, if AI materially influences a decision about someone's job, housing, loan, insurance, health care, or education, you owe them notice, a plain-language explanation after a bad outcome, a chance to fix their data, and meaningful human review. A reviewer who simply defaults to the system's output doesn't count. I connect that to something I'm watching right now in AI coding: people rubber-stamping agent decisions they don't understand, until the agent deletes the database.

Finally, the Monday-morning version, which works in any state:

• inventory every AI-assisted decision about people
• run the Explain-It Test on each one
• measure your reviewers' override rate
• get your vendors to commit, in writing, to explaining individual decisions

• Likes
• Download68
• Share