This update highlights key legislative and regulatory developments in the third quarter of 2026 related to artificial intelligence (“AI”), connected and automated vehicles (“CAVs”), and the Internet of Things (“IoT”).

I. Federal AI Legislative Developments

In the third quarter of 2026, members of Congress focused on several issues related to AI, including the costs and infrastructure demands of data centers, chatbot safety, the use of AI and other automated tools for pricing, and the oversight and governance of AI systems. For example:

  • Data Centers. Lawmakers continued to scrutinize the growing energy and infrastructure demands associated with AI development. For example, the House passed Rep. Gabe Evans’ (R-CO) Ratepayer Protection Act (H.R. 9340), a bipartisan bill that would require certain data center operators to bear costs associated with infrastructure development rather than shifting those costs to ratepayers. The measure failed to advance in the Senate.
  • Chatbot Safety. Congress also continued to advance proposals aimed at addressing the risks of AI chatbots, particularly for minors. Notably, the Senate Commerce Committee advanced several children’s online safety and AI bills, including Sen. Ted Cruz’s (R-TX) CHATBOT Act (S. 4407), which among other requirements, would require providers of AI chatbots to offer family accounts and obtain verifiable parental consent for teens.
  • Algorithmic Pricing. Congress continued to focus on AI-driven “surveillance pricing.” On August 5, the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism, led by Sen. Josh Hawley (R-MO), held a hearing on these practices. Additionally, in the House, Rep. Greg Casar (D-TX), along with 43 cosponsors, introduced the Stop AI Price Gouging and Wage Fixing Act (H.R. 4640), which would prohibit the use of AI systems to inform individualized prices based on personal data.
  • AI Safety and Governance. Lawmakers also devoted significant attention to oversight of advanced AI systems this quarter. For example, Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) introduced the AI Kill Switch Act (H.R. 9917), which would require entities that operate an AI system utilizing a certain quantity of computing power to maintain a shutdown capability. Similarly, Sen. John Kennedy (R-LA) introduced S. 5417, a bill that would require human-controlled shutdown mechanisms in all AI systems

II. Federal AI Regulatory and Executive Developments

In the third quarter of 2026, federal AI activity centered on AI-for-science priorities, consumer protection, cybersecurity vulnerability infrastructure, and the regulation of generative AI-enabled medical devices. For example:

  • White House Expands the Genesis Mission and AI-for-Science Priorities. On July 21, the Assistant to the President and Director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (“OSTP”) published a report to President Trump, titled “Science: A New Golden Age.” The report outlines recommendations to revitalize U.S. research and development (“R&D”) and identifies the Genesis Mission, the Administration’s initiative to use AI, federal scientific datasets, high-performance computing, and autonomous laboratories to accelerate scientific discovery, as a key federal R&D priority.
  • President Trump Issues “Super Intelligence” Executive Order and Voluntary Safety Accord.  On September 29, President Trump issued Executive Order 14434, “Inaugurating the Era of Super Intelligence,” which directs the executive branch to use the terms “Super Intelligence” and “SI” in place of “Artificial Intelligence” and “AI.”  The Executive Order defines these terms by reference to the existing statutory definition of “Artificial Intelligence” under 15 U.S.C. § 9401(3), but it directs the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology to propose an updated legislative definition of “Super Intelligence.”  The same day, President Trump announced a White House Accord titled “Joint Commitment on Frontier Responsibilities.”  The Accord, signed by President Trump and representatives from Google, Anthropic, Meta, OpenAI, XAI, and Nvidia, includes commitments from these companies to implement controls and audits “to ensure that their technology behaves as intended and that any issues are promptly identified and resolved.”  The participating companies also agreed to meet regularly to establish standards and best practices to improve their systems’ safety.
  • FTC Proposes AI Accuracy Policy Statement. On July 7, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) published a proposed policy statement “Concerning the Suppression of Accuracy in Artificial Intelligence Systems,” with a request for public comment. The statement addresses the application of section 5 of the FTC Act to companies that market AI systems, noting that “an AI company might be tempted to alter or steer the output of its systems contrary to consumers’ reasonable expectations for various reasons,” in a way that is deceptive to consumers in violation of section 5.
  • NIST Seeks Input on Modernizing the National Vulnerability Database for the AI Era. On August 12, the National Institute of Standards and Technology (“NIST”) published a Request for Information (“RFI”) on modernizing the National Vulnerability Database in light of AI-enabled cyber tools and increasing demand for machine-consumable security data. The RFI seeks input on how AI and automation could improve vulnerability identification, dissemination, prioritization, remediation, and data standards.
  • FDA Seeks Feedback on Generative AI-Enabled Medical Devices. On August 18, the Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) issued a discussion paper seeking feedback on regulatory considerations for generative AI-enabled medical devices, including risk assessment, premarket evaluation, postmarket monitoring, use of foundation models, and agentic AI systems. The Agency emphasized that the paper does not represent draft or final guidance but instead is intended to gather early stakeholder input on potential approaches to the regulation of GenAI-enabled medical devices. Comments due by October 19.
  • FTC Finalizes Orders Over AI-Powered “Active Listening” Advertising Claims. On August 27, the FTC announced that it had finalized orders with three companies to resolve allegations that they deceived customers by incorrectly claiming to offer an AI-powered service that could target localized ads based on conversations captured from consumers’ smart devices and that consumers had opted into that targeting.

III. State AI Legislative Developments

State lawmakers enacted numerous AI laws during the third quarter of 2026, with over 20 bills enacted in California alone, described in our prior blog posts here and here. Additionally, state legislatures continued to expand the scope of their comprehensive privacy laws to address automated decisionmaking and related topics. Other key themes across legislative developments include:

  • AI Companions. California enacted a set of AI bills, some of which focus on minors using and interacting with AI systems. For example, as previously described here, Adam’s Law (SB 1119) imposes restrictions on operators of companion chatbots in the state. Additionally, Hawaii enacted SB 3001, which requires operators of AI companions to issue certain disclosures and to establish protections for minor users.
  • AI Transparency. During the third quarter, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed two amendments to the state’s AI Transparency Act, and Hawaii enacted HB 2137, which prohibits certain harmful uses of realistic digital imitations generated by AI.
  • Chatbots. In addition to Adam’s Law in California and SB 3001 in Hawaii, California enacted new requirements for customer service chatbots and a prohibition on including companion chatbots in toys until 2031.

IV. Connected & Automated Vehicles

CAV legislative and regulatory activity in the third quarter focused on national security, emergency response and safety, and innovation.

  • National Security. Federal legislators showed increased concern about national security threats posed by CAVs and foreign influence in the automotive industry more broadly. For example, on July 22, the Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee unanimously advanced the Connected Vehicle Security Act of 2026 (S. 4429), and on September 22, the Committee formally reported an amended version of the bill, which was placed on the Senate calendar. The bill builds on and expands the Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security’s (“BIS”) 2025 Connected Vehicles Rule and would prohibit the import, manufacture, sale, or introduction into U.S. commerce of certain connected vehicles that are linked to China, Russia, Iran, or North Korea, or connected vehicles that incorporate hardware or software linked to these countries.
  • Emergency Response and Safety. During the third quarter, federal regulators expressed concerns about interactions between autonomous vehicles (“AVs”) and first responders and called on the industry to address a recent pattern of AV-first responder issues. This concern was echoed by state legislative activity. For example, on July 8, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (“NHTSA”) Administrator Jonathan Morrison issued a letter calling for developers of driverless automated driving systems to immediately focus on improving AV interactions with first responders. The letter noted a “recent, disturbing trend” of driverless AVs interfering with law enforcement and other first responders, as well as failing to recognize and respond to safety conditions like flashing lights, smoke, fire, and traffic cones. Additionally, California Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 1246, which will require remote AV drivers to be U.S.-based and hold a driver’s license valid in California and will impose a number of obligations for AV-first responder interactions.
  • Innovation. The Department of Transportation (“DOT”) and NHTSA took a number of steps in the third quarter to foster innovation, including unveiling a new national AV strategy and modernizing AV-related regulations. For example, in an interview the week of July 16, Administrator Morrison confirmed that NHTSA was planning to issue an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking related to substantive standards for automated driving systems. Additionally, on July 30, NHTSA announced a number of significant AV-related actions. These actions included, among other things, requesting public comment on upcoming AV guidance; streamlining the Part 555 application process, through which automakers may receive temporary exemptions to sell a limited number of non-compliant vehicles (primarily to test new technologies); and publishing an interim final rule that allows the NHTSA Administrator to apply temporary exemptions to vehicles manufactured prior to the effective date of an exemption grant. On September 3, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy announced the “Automated Vehicles National Strategy,” which is meant to “empower our innovators to build faster, smarter and safer than ever before.” Administrator Morrison said that the strategy “will provide for strict safety oversight, while unlocking the potential for AV technologies to be safely deployed on America’s roads.”

V. Internet of Things

In the third quarter, the Federal Communications Commission (“FCC”) took several IoT-related actions, including multiple significant updates to its Covered List.

  • Updates to the Covered List. On July 28, following national security determinations by an Executive interagency body, the FCC updated its Covered List to add two new categories of foreign-produced devices: “advanced robotic devices” (including certain humanoid, quadruped, and other mobile robots meeting certain technical specifications) and connected power inverters. Previous updates had added foreign-produced uncrewed aircraft systems (“UAS”), UAS critical components, and routers to the Covered List. Since July 28, foreign-produced advanced robotic devices and inverter models have been ineligible to receive FCC equipment authorizations without a Conditional Approval from a designated Executive agency, though previously authorized models may continue to be imported, sold, and used in the U.S. The FCC has since published additional guidance and updates addressing both new categories, including to clarify that only inverters that can supply power to a utility are covered. The FCC has also announced that the Department of War has granted Conditional Approvals for specified lines of advanced robotic devices and power inverters from certain manufacturers.
  • FCC Closes the “Component Part Loophole.” On July 22, the FCC adopted a Third Report and Order and Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. The Order prohibits equipment authorization for any device that incorporates logic-bearing hardware components produced by a Covered List entity if the device would be prohibited from authorization if produced by the Covered List entity itself. The Order also: (1) clarifies that marketing rules reach online marketplaces, which must now display the FCC ID at the point of sale; (2) requires full recertification for modifications or limited “permissive changes” made by a Covered List entity; and (3) adopts a narrower definition of “critical infrastructure” for purposes of the Covered List.
  • FCC Proposes Hardware and Software Bills of Materials for Connected Devices. Separately, the FCC’s July 22 Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking proposes requiring companies seeking equipment authorization for specified devices to submit signed hardware and software bills of materials detailing the origin and manufacturer of each component, with the goal of tightening supply-chain security.

We will continue to update you on meaningful developments in these quarterly updates and across our blogs.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Jennifer Johnson Jennifer Johnson

Jennifer Johnson is a partner specializing in communications, media and technology matters who serves as Co-Chair of Covington’s Technology Industry Group and its global and multi-disciplinary Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Internet of Things (IoT) Groups. She represents and advises technology companies, content distributors…

Jennifer Johnson is a partner specializing in communications, media and technology matters who serves as Co-Chair of Covington’s Technology Industry Group and its global and multi-disciplinary Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Internet of Things (IoT) Groups. She represents and advises technology companies, content distributors, television companies, trade associations, and other entities on a wide range of media and technology matters. Jennifer has three decades of experience advising clients in the communications, media and technology sectors, and has held leadership roles in these practices for more than twenty years. On technology issues, she collaborates with Covington’s global, multi-disciplinary team to assist companies navigating the complex statutory and regulatory constructs surrounding this evolving area, including product counseling and technology transactions related to connected and autonomous vehicles, internet connected devices, artificial intelligence, smart ecosystems, and other IoT products and services. Jennifer serves on the Board of Editors of The Journal of Robotics, Artificial Intelligence & Law.

Jennifer assists clients in developing and pursuing strategic business and policy objectives before the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Congress and through transactions and other business arrangements. She regularly advises clients on FCC regulatory matters and advocates frequently before the FCC. Jennifer has extensive experience negotiating content acquisition and distribution agreements for media and technology companies, including program distribution agreements, network affiliation and other program rights agreements, and agreements providing for the aggregation and distribution of content on over-the-top app-based platforms. She also assists investment clients in structuring, evaluating, and pursuing potential investments in media and technology companies.

Photo of Jayne Ponder Jayne Ponder

Jayne Ponder counsels companies on the intersection of privacy, AI, and emerging technology regulation, and routinely represents clients in regulatory inquiries, investigations, and enforcement matters before federal and state agencies.

Jayne counsels clients across industries to launch and enhance products, services, and governance…

Jayne Ponder counsels companies on the intersection of privacy, AI, and emerging technology regulation, and routinely represents clients in regulatory inquiries, investigations, and enforcement matters before federal and state agencies.

Jayne counsels clients across industries to launch and enhance products, services, and governance programs involving their collection and use of data and emerging technologies. Her experience spans U.S. comprehensive privacy, automated decisionmaking, AI governance, biometric privacy, surveillance and algorithmic pricing, and AI transparency, disclosure, and safety frameworks. She partners with clients to design products and governance programs that keep pace with the dynamic regulatory environment, including in connection with digital and online advertising, social media, AI-powered and agentic services, connected devices, and robotics.

In addition, she advises companies on engagement with federal and state regulators, including through enforcement and rulemaking. Jayne analyzes privacy and security risks in complex corporate transactions. She also provides strategic input on the legislative, regulatory, and policy developments shaping the privacy and AI landscape.

Jayne maintains an active pro bono practice, focusing on assisting nonprofits with their privacy programs and elder estate planning.

Photo of Nicholas Xenakis Nicholas Xenakis

Nick Xenakis draws on his Capitol Hill and legal experience to provide public policy and crisis management counsel to clients in a range of industries.

Nick assists clients in developing and implementing policy solutions to litigation and regulatory matters, including on issues involving…

Nick Xenakis draws on his Capitol Hill and legal experience to provide public policy and crisis management counsel to clients in a range of industries.

Nick assists clients in developing and implementing policy solutions to litigation and regulatory matters, including on issues involving antitrust, artificial intelligence, bankruptcy, criminal justice, financial services, immigration, intellectual property, life sciences, national security, and technology. He also represents companies and individuals in investigations before U.S. Senate and House Committees.

Nick previously served as General Counsel for the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee, where he managed committee staff and directed legislative efforts. He also participated in key judicial and Cabinet confirmations, including of Attorneys General and Supreme Court Justices. Before his time on Capitol Hill, Nick served as an attorney with the Federal Public Defender’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia.

Photo of John Mizerak John Mizerak

Jack Mizerak has over a decade of experience advising on safety, environmental, and supply chain issues affecting the manufacturing, transportation, and technology sectors. He has experience with investigations, litigation, and regulatory issues under the Clean Air Act, the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, the…

Jack Mizerak has over a decade of experience advising on safety, environmental, and supply chain issues affecting the manufacturing, transportation, and technology sectors. He has experience with investigations, litigation, and regulatory issues under the Clean Air Act, the Motor Vehicle Safety Act, the Consumer Product Safety Act, the Administrative Procedure Act, the Clean Water Act, as well as numerous state laws.

Jack has extensive expertise in governmental enforcement, including fact development, government engagement, and the adoption of compliance reforms to address underlying issues and prevent recurrence of violations. He was an integral member of a Covington team that resolved one of the ten largest enforcement matters in the history of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Jack regularly advises Fortune 500 companies on responsibly manufacturing and releasing emerging technology, including agentic AI tools, AI-enabled robotics, autonomous vehicles, and consumer goods.

Jack works extensively with clients in the automotive sector, advising original equipment manufacturers, traditional Tier 1, Tier 2, and Tier 3 suppliers, advanced technology and software suppliers, trade associations, and fleet owners on a range of policy, regulatory, compliance, and enforcement issues, spanning both the consumer and freight sectors. He has represented clients facing some of the largest automotive recalls in U.S. history, affecting as much as 15% of vehicles registered in the United States. He also represents clients in the growing micromobility and low-speed vehicle sectors, including manufacturers and fleet operators of personal transportation vehicles, e-bikes, and scooters.

Jack regularly represents clients in the consumer product space more broadly, including manufacturers and online platforms. His work spans the entire product lifecycle, from standard setting for product categories, risk assessments during product development, and litigation and investigations stemming from issues after products have been introduced into commerce.

Photo of Olivia Dworkin Olivia Dworkin

Olivia Dworkin minimizes regulatory and litigation risks for clients in the medical device, pharmaceutical, biotechnology, eCommerce, and digital health industries through strategic advice on complex FDA issues, helping to bring innovative products to market while ensuring regulatory compliance.

With a focus on cutting-edge…

Olivia Dworkin minimizes regulatory and litigation risks for clients in the medical device, pharmaceutical, biotechnology, eCommerce, and digital health industries through strategic advice on complex FDA issues, helping to bring innovative products to market while ensuring regulatory compliance.

With a focus on cutting-edge medical technologies and digital health products and services, Olivia regularly helps new and established companies navigate a variety of state and federal regulatory, legislative, and compliance matters throughout the total product lifecycle. She has experience counseling clients on the development, FDA regulatory classification, and commercialization of digital health tools, including clinical decision support software, mobile medical applications, general wellness products, medical device data systems, administrative support software, and products that incorporate artificial intelligence, machine learning, and other emerging technologies.

Olivia also assists clients in advocating for legislative and regulatory policies that will support innovation and the safe deployment of digital health tools, including by drafting comments on proposed legislation, frameworks, whitepapers, and guidance documents. Olivia keeps close to the evolving regulatory landscape and is a frequent contributor to Covington’s Digital Health blog. Her work also has been featured in the Journal of Robotics, Artificial Intelligence & Law, Law360, and the Michigan Journal of Law and Mobility.

Prior to joining Covington, Olivia was a fellow at the University of Michigan Veterans Legal Clinic, where she gained valuable experience as the lead attorney successfully representing clients at case evaluations, mediations, and motion hearings. At Michigan Law, Olivia served as Online Editor of the Michigan Journal of Gender and Law, president of the Trial Advocacy Society, and president of the Michigan Law Mock Trial Team. She excelled in national mock trial competitions, earning two Medals for Excellence in Advocacy from the American College of Trial Lawyers and being selected as one of the top sixteen advocates in the country for an elite, invitation-only mock trial tournament.

Photo of John Bowers John Bowers

John Bowers is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office. He is a member of the Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group and the Technology and Communications Regulation Practice Group.

John advises clients on a wide range of privacy and communications issues…

John Bowers is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office. He is a member of the Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group and the Technology and Communications Regulation Practice Group.

John advises clients on a wide range of privacy and communications issues, including compliance with telecommunications regulations and U.S. state and federal privacy laws.

Photo of Conor Kane Conor Kane

Conor Kane advises clients on a broad range of privacy, artificial intelligence, telecommunications, and emerging technology matters. He assists clients with complying with state privacy laws, developing AI governance structures, and engaging with the Federal Communications Commission.

Before joining Covington, Conor worked in…

Conor Kane advises clients on a broad range of privacy, artificial intelligence, telecommunications, and emerging technology matters. He assists clients with complying with state privacy laws, developing AI governance structures, and engaging with the Federal Communications Commission.

Before joining Covington, Conor worked in digital advertising helping teams develop large consumer data collection and analytics platforms. He uses this experience to advise clients on matters related to digital advertising and advertising technology.

Photo of Rosie Moss Rosie Moss

Rosie Moss is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office. She is a member of the Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group and the Technology and Communications Regulation Practice Group.

Rosie advises clients on a wide range of data privacy and technology…

Rosie Moss is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office. She is a member of the Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group and the Technology and Communications Regulation Practice Group.

Rosie advises clients on a wide range of data privacy and technology regulatory issues, including emerging artificial intelligence compliance matters. She assists clients in complying with federal and state privacy laws and Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations. Rosie also maintains an active pro bono practice.

Photo of Evan Chiacchiaro Evan Chiacchiaro

Evan Chiacchiaro is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office and member of the Technology and Communications Regulation Practice Group.

Evan advises clients on a range of technology regulatory issues, including emerging artificial intelligence compliance matters and compliance with Federal Communications Commission…

Evan Chiacchiaro is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office and member of the Technology and Communications Regulation Practice Group.

Evan advises clients on a range of technology regulatory issues, including emerging artificial intelligence compliance matters and compliance with Federal Communications Commission (FCC) regulations. Evan also maintains an active pro bono practice focused on civil rights.

Photo of Irene Kim Irene Kim

Irene Kim is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office, where she is a member of the Privacy and Cybersecurity and Advertising and Consumer Protection Investigations practice groups. She advises clients on a broad range of issues, including U.S. state and federal…

Irene Kim is an associate in the firm’s Washington, DC office, where she is a member of the Privacy and Cybersecurity and Advertising and Consumer Protection Investigations practice groups. She advises clients on a broad range of issues, including U.S. state and federal AI legislation, comprehensive state privacy laws, and regulatory compliance matters.

Photo of Clare Mathias Clare Mathias

Clare Mathias is an associate in the firm’s Boston office. She is a member of the Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group and the Health Care Practice Group.

Clare advises clients on a wide range of privacy and health care issues, including compliance…

Clare Mathias is an associate in the firm’s Boston office. She is a member of the Data Privacy and Cybersecurity Practice Group and the Health Care Practice Group.

Clare advises clients on a wide range of privacy and health care issues, including compliance with federal health care regulations and U.S. state and federal privacy laws.

Clare also maintains an active pro-bono practice.