Insights

As companies and individuals increasingly embed AI tools in legal practice, courts are grappling with how to treat communications with, and information generated by, these tools. Chief among these questions is whether and in what circumstances attorney-client privilege and work-product protections as they are applied in different jurisdictions extend to AI-generated content or communications with an AI tool.

Meta continues to face lawsuits around the country alleging that its platforms are designed to induce compulsive use by children. In March 2026, a California jury delivered a landmark verdict that Meta and YouTube were liable for allegedly addictive platform features that resulted in a child’s mental health distress.  

In two recent pathbreaking judgments, juries in California and New Mexico held social media companies civilly liable for harming minors who used their products.

In its latest attempt to establish a national AI regulatory standard and quash “cumbersome” state AI laws, the White House on Friday, March 20, 2026, released legislative recommendations for a National Policy Framework on Artificial Intelligence. 

On March 6, 2026, the General Services Administration (GSA) issued a significant proposed contract clause, GSAR 552.239-7001, Basic Safeguarding of Artificial Intelligence Systems (“Clause”), for inclusion in GSA Schedule solicitations and contracts for AI capabilities.  The proposed clause would impose substantial new requirements related to AI sources, intellectual property rights, data use, change management, and performance standards.  The Clause would also take precedence over any other contract terms (including commercial licensing terms) related to AI, including a Seller’s terms of sale and service to which the Government had previously agreed.  GSA requests comments by March 20, 2026.

On February 26, 2026, the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee voted 22-1 to advance the Health Care Cybersecurity and Resiliency Act of 2026. Sponsored by a bipartisan group — led by HELP Committee Chair Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA); and Senators Mark Warner (D-VA), Maggie Hassan (D-NH), and John Cornyn (R-TX) — the bill represents perhaps the most significant federal legislative effort to overhaul health care cybersecurity since the passage of the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health (HITECH) Act in 2009, and would compel health care companies to make major investments in cybersecurity.

On March 6, 2026, the White House released its National Cyber Strategy (Strategy) and issued an accompanying Executive Order, “Combating Cybercrime, Fraud, and Predatory Schemes Against American Citizens” (EO). These documents outline the administration’s priorities for combating cybercrime and call for coordination across the federal government and the private sector to invest in new technologies, continue innovation, and prioritize the United States’ cyber capabilities. Key sectors of concern include energy, financial services, telecommunications, data centers, water, and health care. The Strategy and EO encourage increased public-private coordination, signal greater latitude for private sector offensive cyber operations, prioritize securing critical infrastructure, elevate cybercrime as a national security priority, outline a path for victim compensation, and promote streamlining cyber regulations.

On February 13, 2026, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) announced upcoming virtual town hall meetings scheduled for March 2026 regarding the implementation of the Cyber Incident Reporting for Critical Infrastructure Act of 2022 (CIRCIA).  The meetings will allow industry stakeholders to provide input to DHS to refine the “scope and burden” of the forthcoming CIRCIA final rule.

The National Institute of Standards and Technology (“NIST”) recently released draft guidelines for applying NIST’s Cybersecurity Framework to organizations adopting artificial intelligence. NIST requests public comments on its “Initial Preliminary Draft” Cybersecurity Framework Profile for Artificial Intelligence (the “Cyber AI Profile”) by midnight on January 30, 2026. 

In an important first, the yearly defense policy law, the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) for Fiscal Year 2026, directs the Department of Defense (DoD)  to develop and implement a framework addressing the cybersecurity and physical security of artificial intelligence and machine learning technologies (AI/ML) acquired by the Pentagon.

On December 4, 2025, an advisory committee of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC or Commission) voted to advance a recommendation that the agency issue guidance requiring issuers to disclose information about the impact of artificial intelligence (AI) on their companies.

On December 18, 2025, the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act (FY 2026 NDAA) (P.L. 119-60) was signed into law. The Act makes significant changes to defense acquisition, sourcing restrictions, and interactions between the Defense Industrial Base (DIB) and the Department of Defense (DOD). 

In July 2025, President Trump signed Executive Order (EO) 14319, Preventing Woke AI in the Federal Government, to preclude the federal government from procuring artificial intelligence (AI) models that incorporate “ideological biases or social agendas,” including “diversity, equity, and inclusion.” The EO mandates that the federal government purchase only large language models (LLMs) developed according to two “Unbiased AI Principles” — that they be “truth-seeking” and show “ideological neutrality.” To implement these principles, the EO directed the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to issue guidance.

On December 11, 2025, President Trump signed a much-anticipated Executive Order that seeks to forestall state regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) by threatening federal lawsuits and the withholding of some federal funds and calls for a national policy framework on AI. The Executive Order, Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence (EO), declares it the policy of the administration “to sustain and enhance the United States’ global AI dominance through a minimally burdensome national policy framework for AI.”

President Trump is preparing to sign an Executive Order that would seek to forestall state regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) by threatening federal lawsuits and the withholding of some federal funds. The draft, unsigned six-page Executive Order, “Eliminating State Law Obstruction of National AI Policy” (EO), the text of which has been circulating publicly since November 19, would declare it the policy of the Administration “to sustain and enhance America’s global AI dominance through a minimally burdensome, uniform national policy framework for AI.”

In the first few years following the public launch of generative artificial intelligence (AI) in the autumn of 2022, litigation related to AI focused primarily on claims of copyright infringement. Suits revolved around allegations that the data on which AI models train, and/or the output they produce, infringe upon the intellectual property rights of others. (While some of these cases have settled or reached preliminary judgments, many remain ongoing.)

Marking a significant milestone toward the broad deployment of commercial drones over American skies, the Federal Aviation Administration (“FAA”) and Transportation Security Administration issued a proposed rule in August that would streamline how drones can operate when they fly beyond the visual line of sight of their operators.

On September 9, 2025, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court’s denial of a preliminary injunction as to certain provisions of California’s Protecting Our Kids from Social Media Addiction Act. This interlocutory ruling is significant for two reasons. First, it demonstrates why and how state laws can withstand and avoid First Amendment challenges. Second, it showcases the potential difficulties in establishing associational standing on behalf of member technology and digital commerce companies.

On September 29, 2025, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed into law Senate Bill 53, the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act (TFAIA). This landmark legislation represents California’s most significant regulation to date of AI developers.

On September 26, the White House invited the public to submit comments on Federal laws, rules, and policies that “unnecessarily hinder” the development or deployment of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies in the United States. This request marks one of the Trump Administration’s most substantial moves yet to reduce the regulatory burden on AI. Respondents may submit comments through a government website until October 27, 2025.