The Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TRAIGA) takes a different shape from Colorado's: rather than regulating automated decision-making broadly, it prohibits specific AI uses and backs them with Attorney General enforcement. To know whether your systems cross a line, you have to know what they actually do.
The Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (HB 149) took effect January 1, 2026. The enacted version was pared back from earlier drafts: rather than a broad duty of care, it draws lines around specific, largely intent-based AI uses, adds healthcare-disclosure duties, and puts the heaviest affirmative obligations on state agencies — all enforced through the Texas Attorney General. Confirm how it applies to you with counsel.
Its standards are largely intent-based — reaching AI developed or deployed for prohibited purposes — and it includes provisions for government use of AI, plus a regulatory sandbox for testing.
Every one of these obligations starts in the same place: knowing exactly which AI systems you run and what they touch. That's the read we produce.
TRAIGA's intent-based standard sounds like a legal question, but it rests on a technical one: what do your AI systems actually do, on what inputs, to produce what outputs? You can't argue a system wasn't deployed for a prohibited purpose if you can't describe how it works.
And because TRAIGA reaches companies doing business in Texas regardless of where they're headquartered, the systems in scope include the ones your own team may not have catalogued — the third-party model, the inherited feature, the AI inside a dependency.
Every model, API and LLM call in your code — including the shadow AI nobody reported.
Which systems make consequential decisions, and what regulated data flows into each one.
A signed, source-traced map your counsel turns into the notices and assessments Texas TRAIGA requires.
TRAIGA is the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (HB 149), enacted in 2025 and in effect since January 1, 2026. It prohibits specific AI uses — such as harmful manipulation, unlawful discrimination, and certain social-scoring and biometric practices — and enforces them through the Texas Attorney General. (The term also happens to be a Spanish verb; here it refers to the Texas AI law.)
TRAIGA reaches those who develop or deploy AI systems in the course of doing business in Texas, along with specific provisions for government use. Because it follows the activity rather than the headquarters, out-of-state companies serving Texas can be in scope — which makes a complete AI inventory the starting point.
Colorado's AI law (reenacted in 2026 as SB 26-189) regulates automated decision-making technology used in consequential decisions. TRAIGA instead prohibits specific, largely intent-based uses and enforces them through the Attorney General. Different structure, same prerequisite: you have to know what your AI systems do to assess either.
We surface every AI system in your code and describe what each one actually does — its inputs, outputs and the decisions it influences. That technical read is what your counsel uses to assess whether any system implicates TRAIGA's prohibitions, rather than relying on after-the-fact descriptions.
This page is general information, not legal advice. AI statutes and their effective dates are moving targets; confirm what applies to you with your own counsel. We produce the technical read — the source-traced map of the AI in your code — that your counsel maps to the obligations that actually bind you.
Three weeks. Fixed price. Read-only. We surface every AI system in your code and describe what each one does — the technical basis your counsel maps to TRAIGA.
Get an AI Compliance AuditThree weeks · Fixed price · Read-only · No engineering meetings