Tech Industry: Maryland Should Halt AI Bill and Defer to Working Group
Maryland should create an AI working group instead of passing high-risk AI legislation modeled after Virginia’s potential AI law, tech industry representatives told Maryland’s Senate Finance Committee on Thursday.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
The committee heard testimony on SB-936. Introduced by Sen. Katie Hester (D), SB-936 is an attorney general-enforced proposal that includes a private right of action. It seeks to give consumers data correction rights and penalize companies that discriminate using algorithmic decisonmaking. The tech industry urged legislators to hold off on SB-936 and approve HB-956, which would establish an AI working group with a July 2026 deadline for legislative recommendations. The Senate Finance Committee is expected to vote on SB-936 in the coming weeks.
Hester told the committee that AI developers and deployers provide little transparency about AI algorithms, mass data collection and decisionmaking processes that impact hiring, employment and financial decisions. AI-related data collection comes with significant privacy breach risks, she added. Of all the state AI proposals and laws, Hester said the Maryland proposal most closely resembles Virginia’s AI legislation. That bill awaits the signature of Gov. Glenn Youngkin (R) (see 2502200003). Virginia legislators removed the bill’s private right of action during the amendment process.
The Center for Democracy and Technology, Consumer Reports, Electronic Privacy Information Center and the AFL-CIO testified in favor of SB-936 Thursday. AI systems have life-changing impacts, and they need independent evaluation, said Maryland AFL-CIO President Donna Edwards.
Assistant Attorney General Hanna Abrams testified in favor, saying there are gaps in existing anti-discrimination laws and how they apply to digital platforms. However, she said the AG “needs appropriate resources” to enforce the new law: “We currently do not have them." Abrams recommended legislators clarify in the legislation that a violation of SB-936 is also a violation of Maryland’s Consumer Protection Act. At a previous hearing this week, Maryland AG Anthony Brown (D) supported a 6% tax on data brokers to fund and establish a privacy unit in his office (see 2502250042).
TechNet, Chamber of Progress, Security Industry Association (SIA) and the Maryland Chamber of Commerce urged legislators to pass the AI working group bill. Maryland Chamber President-Government Affairs Grason Wiggins noted that the Virginia bill still faces a veto threat, and Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont (D) in 2024 opposed a similar AI proposal in his state.
SIA testified that its members don’t believe AI is an “absolutely real issue right now with very immediate harm.” TechNet Executive Director-Mid-Atlantic Region Margaret Durkin said the working group is a better first step to regulating the technology.
Sen. Stephen Hershey (R) said Maryland should be cognizant of how other states are approaching AI regulation and suggested the working group could be a better option.
Sen. Dawn Gile (D), a co-sponsor of the legislation, asked panelists to explain why an AI law is needed when Maryland already has consumer protection laws on the books. EPIC legal fellow Kara Williams said SB-936 provides the transparency rights needed to enforce those existing consumer protection laws: Consumers can’t bring discrimination claims forward if they don’t know how platforms are using algorithms.