What This Bill Does
The GUARD Act would require artificial intelligence chatbots to verify users’ ages, create user accounts for access, and repeatedly disclose that the chatbot is not a human being. It would apply to covered entities that own, operate, or make chatbots available in the United States, and it would require stronger data-security practices for age-verification information. The bill also includes criminal penalties in the draft text for chatbots that solicit minors into sexually explicit conduct or promote suicide, self-injury, or imminent violence, with fines of up to $100,000 per offense.
- Requires a user account to access an AI chatbot.
- Existing accounts would be frozen until age is verified under a reasonable process.
- New users must have their age verified at signup; birthdate self-attestation alone is not enough.
- Chatbots must disclose at the start of each conversation and every 30 minutes that they are AI, not human.
- Violations involving minors, self-harm, or violence can trigger fines of up to $100,000 per offense.
Who This Bill Affects
For the general public, this bill would make AI chatbot use more age-gated and more explicit about being non-human. If you or your family use chatbots, the biggest concrete effects would be account creation requirements, possible age checks, and repeated disclosures during conversations; companies would also have to handle age-verification data under stricter security and retention rules. Users who are minors could be blocked from AI companions, while adults may face additional verification steps before access is restored or granted.
See how this bill affects you — sign in for a personalized analysisWho Supports & Opposes This
- Parents and child-safety advocates They are likely to argue that minors need stronger protection from chatbots that can mimic friendship, manipulate emotions, or expose children to sexual or self-harm content. The bill’s age verification, repeated disclosures, and restrictions on deceptive human-like behavior are designed to reduce those risks.
- Privacy-conscious users and consumer-protection advocates They may support the bill’s requirement that companies minimize data collection, encrypt age-verification data, limit retention, and forbid sharing or selling that data. In their view, the bill tries to balance safety with limits on how much personal information platforms can keep.
- Some AI developers and platform operators Companies that want clearer federal rules may support a uniform standard for disclosures and age checks rather than a patchwork of state requirements. The bill could also create a clearer compliance target for products marketed to adults versus minors.
- AI platform operators and app developers They may argue that mandatory age verification adds cost, friction, and liability, especially for services with millions of users. They could also say the requirement to freeze existing accounts and repeatedly re-verify ages will reduce usability and increase abandonment.
- Privacy and civil-liberties advocates They may object that age verification can require collection of sensitive identity data, including government-issued identification or other reliable methods tied to a specific user. Even with security rules, they may worry about data breaches, surveillance, or overcollection.
- Free-speech and access advocates They may argue that the bill could overrestrict lawful speech by making platforms liable for chatbots that discuss sensitive topics such as sexuality, self-harm, or violence. They may also worry that broad compliance incentives will cause companies to block more users or conversations than necessary.
Key Implications
-
““require each individual accessing an artificial intelligence chatbot to make a user account””
This would end fully anonymous access to covered chatbots. Users would need an account before interacting, which makes platforms more able to track access and apply age-based restrictions.
-
““on such date, freeze any such account””
Existing accounts would not simply continue unchanged. Platforms would have to suspend functionality until the user completes the bill’s age-verification process.
-
““a user to confirm that the user is not a minor… is not sufficient””
Simple self-attestation would not satisfy the law. Companies would need a more robust verification method, such as government ID or another commercially reasonable process that reliably determines adulthood.
-
““at the initiation of each conversation… and at 30-minute intervals””
The bill requires repeated disclosure during use, not just a one-time notice. That means long conversations would have periodic reminders that the system is AI, not a human being.
-
““fined not more than $100,000 per offense””
The draft criminal penalties create substantial financial exposure for violations tied to minors, sexually explicit conduct, self-harm, or imminent violence. That penalty level is meant to deter risky chatbot design and deployment.
Latest Status
May 11, 2026
Placed on Senate Legislative Calendar under General Orders. Calendar No. 406.
Will It Pass?
29% estimated chance of becoming law
As reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee on May 11, 2026, the bill is on the Senate Legislative Calendar as Calendar No. 406. It was introduced by Sen. Hawley with a bipartisan group of cosponsors that includes Sens. Blumenthal, Britt, Warner, Murphy, Kelly, Gallego, Lee, Lankford, Cotton, Welch, Hassan, Cortez Masto, Kaine, Gillibrand, Ricketts, Blackburn, Whitehouse, Durbin, and Coons, indicating cross-party interest in the subject. The text provided does not include a final vote, and the reported version reflects committee action with an amendment striking and replacing the earlier text.
Pass percentages are model estimates and may be inaccurate.
Take Action
Get more from BillBoard
Free tools to understand, respond to, and track this bill.
Ask AI about this billData sourced from api.congress.gov.