EveryAILaw.comThe API and MCP server for AI law.
Other trackers tell you what the law says. EveryAILaw lets your software check it. 53 instruments, 10 obligations, 134 provisions across 31 jurisdictions — structured JSON (no auth, no rate limits) and a 14-tool MCP server (free tier + Pro tier with higher limits, webhooks, audit log). 35 currently enforcing. Verified Jun 30, 2026.
MCP demo & integration recipes →
3-model consensus cascade • per-provision evidence trail • 156 laws evaluated & excluded with reasons
Upcoming Enforcement Deadlines
What Would You Like to Do?
Laws, Regulations, Decrees, Standards & Frameworks
Enforcing instruments with the nearest effective dates. 53 instruments tracked across 31 jurisdictions.
| Instrument | Type | Jurisdiction | Status | Effective | Provisions |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| California AI Transparency Act (SB 942) updated | law | California | phased enforcement | Aug 2, 2026 | 2 |
| EU AI Act updated | law | European Union | phased enforcement | Aug 2, 2026 | 6 |
| Law on Artificial Intelligence | law | Vietnam | enforcing | Mar 1, 2026 | 3 |
| IT (Intermediary Guidelines) Amendment Rules 2026 — Synthetic Media | regulation | India | enforcing | Feb 20, 2026 | 2 |
| Work Health and Safety Amendment (Digital Work Systems) Act 2026 updated | law | New South Wales | enforcing | Feb 18, 2026 | 2 |
| AI Basic Act | law | South Korea | enforcing | Jan 22, 2026 | 3 |
| Law on Artificial Intelligence | law | Kazakhstan | enforcing | Jan 18, 2026 | 4 |
| California SB 53 (Frontier AI Transparency Act) | law | California | enforcing | Jan 1, 2026 | 2 |
| Illinois HB 3773 (AI in Employment) updated | law | Illinois | enforcing | Jan 1, 2026 | 1 |
| Texas TRAIGA (HB 149) | law | Texas | enforcing | Jan 1, 2026 | 1 |
Obligations
Requirement that organizations ensure sufficient AI literacy among staff who develop, deploy, or oversee AI systems, tailored to their roles and responsibilities.
Requirement to prevent, detect, and mitigate discriminatory outcomes from AI systems, including testing for disparate impact across protected classes.
Requirement to demonstrate that AI systems conform to applicable requirements through formal assessment procedures, potentially including third-party audits.
Requirement to manage training data, ensure data quality, document data provenance, and maintain appropriate data governance practices for AI systems.
Requirement to provide meaningful explanations of how AI systems reach decisions, particularly when those decisions significantly affect individuals.
Requirement that humans maintain meaningful oversight over AI-assisted decisions, including the ability to understand, override, and intervene in automated outputs.
Requirement to report AI-related incidents, safety concerns, or failures to regulatory authorities within specified timeframes.
Requirement to maintain records of AI system development, deployment decisions, and operational logs sufficient for regulatory review.
Requirement to assess and document the risks posed by AI systems, including potential harms, bias, and impacts on affected individuals.
Requirement to disclose AI involvement to users, label AI-generated content, and provide adequate information about system capabilities and limitations.
Need help navigating AI compliance for your organization?
Contact PAICE