Blogs

Illinois legislature passes landmark AI safety bill

6/15/26

By: Jacob Berlinger and Sara Correa

The Illinois House of Representatives passed Senate Bill 315 on May 27, 2026, advancing landmark legislation that would require major AI developers, such as OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google DeepMind, to undergo independent third-party audits of their safety practices. If signed into law, as Governor JB Pritzker has indicated he intends to do, the bill would represent one of the most significant state-level statutory checks on the power of AI developers to date.

Who does SB 315 apply to?

SB 315 applies to “frontier developers,” which the bill defines as any person or entity that trains—or begins training—a “frontier model,” meaning highly advanced AI systems developed using exceptionally large amounts of computing power. In practice, however, many of the bill’s key requirements are aimed at “large frontier developers,” defined as frontier developers with more than $500 million in annual gross revenue.

The bill applies when a frontier developer develops, deploys, or operates a frontier AI model in Illinois, even if only part of that activity takes place in the state.

What are the requirements of SB 315?

• Annual Third-Party Audits: SB 315 would require developers to undergo annual, independent third-party audits to verify compliance with the developer’s AI safety framework—an element that remains contentious among some industry groups.
• Public Safety Plans: The bill would also require covered developers to create, implement, publish, and annually update a transparency framework describing how they assess severe or catastrophic risks, apply industry safety standards and mitigations, evaluate model capabilities and cybersecurity concerns, and identify, respond to, and report safety incidents as necessary. SB 315 would further require transparency reports before the deployment of new or substantially modified frontier AI models.
• Disclosure Statements and Administrative Fees: Amendments to SB 315 would also require large frontier developers to file disclosure statements with primary points of contact and places of business, and to pay proportional fees intended to cover the costs associated with administering and enforcing the act.
• Whistleblower Protections: SB 315 includes whistleblower protections and internal reporting processes for employees who raise safety concerns related to AI development or deployment.

How is SB 315 Enforced?

The bill authorizes significant civil penalties for noncompliance, with fines of up to $1 million per violation and up to $3 million for repeat violations. Enforcement authority is vested exclusively in the Illinois Attorney General, and the bill does not create a private right of action, meaning individuals cannot sue developers directly for alleged violations of the law.

Why SB 315 M matters

SB 315 reflects a growing concern among lawmakers that existing laws have not kept pace with the rapid development of advanced AI systems. Frontier AI models are increasingly capable of performing complex tasks, but they also raise unique risks related to safety, cybersecurity, misinformation, and unintended consequences at scale. Illinois lawmakers have framed SB 315 as a way to address those risks proactively, before serious harm occurs.

If enacted, the law would place Illinois among a small number of states taking a comprehensive, enforceable approach to AI oversight. SB 315 signals that states may play a leading role in shaping how AI systems are governed and, in particular, that Illinois is willing to impose meaningful consequences for noncompliance. Taken together, these features suggest a regulatory approach aimed at accountability and risk management, rather than reactive enforcement.

For more information on this topic, please contact Jacob Berlinger , Sara Correa or your local FMG attorney.

Information conveyed herein should not be construed as legal advice or represent any specific or binding policy or procedure of any organization. Information provided is for educational purposes only. These materials are written in a general format and not intended to be advice applicable to any specific circumstance. Legal opinions may vary when based on subtle factual distinctions. All rights reserved. No part of this presentation may be reproduced, published or posted without the written permission of Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP.