Texas Gov. Greg Abbott signed a new bill into law last month regulating the use of AI in the Lone Star State.
The Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA 2.0)—sponsored by Republican State Rep. Giovanni Capriglione—attempts to govern the development, deployment, and use of AI in the country’s second largest state.
In some ways, the Texas law mirrors other notable AI legislation in its scope, including the Colorado Artificial Intelligence Act, which prohibits algorithmic discrimination and the EU AI Act. But it stops short of those other measures.
John Rood, founder and CEO of Proceptual, a firm working at the intersection of HR and AI, told HR Brew he was surprised to learn the details of this legislation emerging from Texas.
“The earlier drafts of the Texas regulation were much more stringent and much closer to Colorado and much closer to European Union AI act, and those protections have been substantially watered down,” Rood said.
What HR should know. The Texas law bans businesses from developing or deploying AI systems with the intent of unlawfully discriminating against a protected class under federal or state law. This provision makes clear that demonstrating a “disparate impact” of the technology would not meet the requirements of a violation under the law, and note that an “intentional and substantial modification” is also needed.
Additionally, the measure creates a sandbox program allowing developers to create and test AI systems in a safer environment before going public. On a broader, regulatory scale, this aspect mirrors AI enablement strategies that some companies have found useful for testing and deploying AI systems in the workplace.
While the law does not allow individual complainants to bring lawsuits, it authorizes the Texas attorney general to bring actions against employers and levy steep penalties, including:
- $10,000–$12,000 fines for “curable” violations following a period of noncompliance for 60 days after being notified by the AG’s office;
- up to $200,000 fines for “uncurable” violations, as determined by a court; and
- up to $40,000 per day for continuing violations.
Quick-to-read HR news & insights
From recruiting and retention to company culture and the latest in HR tech, HR Brew delivers up-to-date industry news and tips to help HR pros stay nimble in today’s fast-changing business environment.
Root said the emerging regulatory framework means that organizations need to start implementing a “fairly robust system of AI governance, and that the governance system should comply pretty closely with a recognized standard.”
Rood pointed to the IS0 42001, a framework developed by the International Organization for Standardization, as well as the the National Institute of Standards and Technology’s (NIST) AI Risk Management Framework as two guideposts for developing a strategy for AI governance and compliance with the emerging patchwork of legislation.
The Texas law, much like Colorado’s, points to the NIST framework as an affirmative defense against violations to the statute.
“All of these regulations that we’re seeing have a clear off-ramp for companies…which is: just do AI governance,” Rood said. “It’s relatively clear what that set of activities would be for someone trying to comply.”
The Texas AI Act goes into effect January 1, 2026. Rood suggested that employers doing business in the Lone Star State begin developing risk frameworks aligned with NIST or the ISO immediately.
“The HR leader right now faces a task that at first seems monumental because they’re dealing with a number of very complicated regulations and multiple jurisdictions,” said Rood, “but the action that they must take in order to comply is simple, but not easy, which is implementing a system of AI governance.”