6 dated developments from March 2026 that bear on AI compliance, each checked against the source linked. Entries are tagged by industry; the newest developments and fixed deadlines ahead are on the AI regulation news page.
Feeds (Atom): All changes · Banks and credit unions · Private equity and asset managers · Hospitals and health systems · Insurers · Employers and HR · Law firms and legal teams · Manufacturers · Importers and exporters. Data: updates.json.
H.R. 3447, as introduced, would direct Commerce to require chip security mechanisms that implement location verification on covered advanced AI chips before export, and would require licensed exporters to report credible information of diversion or tampering. The committee ordered it reported in the nature of a substitute on March 26, 2026. As of October 23, 2026, it had not received a House floor vote, and the Senate companion, S. 1705, had no action after its May 8, 2025 referral. It is not law.
Source: H.R. 3447 bill status, govinfo.gov · Guide: AI compliance, layer by layer
After finding more than two dozen fake citations and misrepresentations across three appeals, the Sixth Circuit ordered each of two lawyers to pay $15,000 to the court registry, ordered them jointly to reimburse the appellees' appellate attorney fees and pay double costs, and referred them for possible discipline. The lawyers did not answer the court's question whether they used generative AI.
Source: Whiting v. City of Athens, Nos. 24-5918/5919, 25-5424 (6th Cir.) · Guide: AI compliance, layer by layer
At the California Supreme Court's August 22, 2025 request, the State Bar's ethics committee approved for public comment proposed amendments to Rules 1.1, 1.4, 1.6, 3.3, 5.1, and 5.3, including a duty to independently review and verify AI output and to verify that cited authorities exist. The proposals need Board of Trustees approval and Supreme Court adoption before they bind anyone.
Source: Proposed Amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct Related to Artificial Intelligence, State Bar of California · Guide: AI compliance, layer by layer
Nippon Life Insurance Co. of America alleges that ChatGPT practiced law without a license in Illinois by helping a self-represented litigant draft filings, and seeks damages and an injunction. The claims are allegations; OpenAI moved to dismiss; on August 28, 2026 the court listed that motion as under advisement, and the case was pending in October 2026.
Source: Nippon Life Insurance Co. of America v. OpenAI Foundation, No. 1:26-cv-02448 (N.D. Ill.), docket · Guide: AI compliance, layer by layer
The court denied xAI's motion for a preliminary injunction against AB 2013, California's generative AI training data transparency law (No. 2:25-cv-12295), according to the case page maintained by the Center for AI and Digital Policy, which dates the order March 4, 2026. xAI appealed to the Ninth Circuit (No. 26-1591, docketed March 17, 2026); the appeal was pending as of October 23, 2026, and AB 2013 remains enforceable while it proceeds.
Source: Center for AI and Digital Policy, Training Data Transparency (AB 2013) case page · Guide: California AI laws
California, Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, and Wisconsin piloted the exam tool, with the pilot running through September 2026.
Source: Fenwick, NAIC Expands AI Systems Evaluation Tool Pilot Program to 12 States (March 9, 2026) · Guide: AI in insurance