A 48-Hour Update on SB 26-189: Public Hearing Notice Published, Moving Rulemaking from Initiation to Active Public Engagement Phase
Published: May 28, 2026
By: Zeeshan Khan
Reading time: 15 minutes
Category: Technology / Consumer Rights / Law
Note: May 28, 2026 – This is an update to the May 26, 2026 article: Colorado AI Law Moves Forward as Attorney General Formally Initiates Rulemaking – Enforcement Remains on Hold Pending Completion
DENVER – May 28, 2026 – Two days after the Colorado Attorney General formally initiated rulemaking for Senate Bill 26-189, the office has taken the next procedural step by publishing a notice of public rulemaking hearing. The notice, published on May 27, 2026, announces that the Attorney General will accept oral and written comments on proposed rules implementing the state’s new AI anti-discrimination law.
The May 26 article correctly noted that rulemaking had been formally initiated with a notice of intent published on May 25. The new public hearing notice moves the process from the “initiation” phase to the active “public engagement” phase, allowing stakeholders to provide input before proposed rules are drafted. The Attorney General’s commitment not to enforce the law until after rulemaking concludes remains in effect, and the substantive obligations of SB 26-189 still take effect on January 1, 2027.
This development represents the second official step in implementing the nation’s most closely watched AI anti-discrimination legislation. The rulemaking process will define key terms including “meaningful human review,” adverse outcome notice content, record retention standards, and the scope of covered automated decision-making technology (ADMT). With a federal lawsuit from Elon Musk’s xAI still pending, the compliance timeline remains subject to further developments.
The Essentials: Who, What, When, Where, Why, How (Last 48 Hours)
Who: Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, who has now published a public rulemaking hearing notice and remains committed to not enforcing the law until after the process concludes; Colorado Governor Jared Polis, who signed the bill on May 14; AI developers and deployers doing business in Colorado; HIPAA-covered entities and business associates, who are explicitly exempted; and consumers, employees, and job applicants affected by algorithmic decisions.
What: Two major developments since May 26, 2026:
- The Attorney General has published a notice of public rulemaking hearing, announcing that oral and written comments will be accepted on proposed rules implementing SB 26-189
- The Attorney General’s commitment not to enforce the law until after rulemaking concludes remains in effect, creating a continued enforcement pause
When:
- May 27, 2026 – Attorney General’s office publishes notice of public rulemaking hearing
- May 25, 2026 – Attorney General’s office publishes formal notice of intent to commence rulemaking (previously reported)
- May 22, 2026 – Previous article published, noting rulemaking had not yet begun
- May 14, 2026 – Governor Polis signs SB 26-189 into law
- January 1, 2027 – Law’s substantive obligations take effect (unchanged)
Where: The rulemaking process is conducted by the Colorado Attorney General’s office in Denver. The public hearing will be held in Colorado, with virtual participation options expected. The law applies to any entity “doing business in Colorado” that develops or deploys covered ADMT, affecting companies nationwide that serve Colorado residents.
Why (Immediate Cause): The Attorney General is required to adopt rules by January 1, 2027, to implement the law. Publishing a public hearing notice is a required procedural step under Colorado’s Administrative Procedure Act, allowing stakeholders to provide input before proposed rules are drafted.
How (Mechanism): The Attorney General has broad rulemaking authority under the new law. The public hearing notice initiates the formal comment period. After receiving public input, the Attorney General will draft proposed rules, publish them for additional comment, and then adopt final rules. The rulemaking process will establish specific regulatory requirements and interpretations for key statutory terms.
Specific Updates in the Last 48 Hours (May 26–28, 2026)
1. Attorney General Publishes Public Rulemaking Hearing Notice (May 27)
On May 27, 2026, the Colorado Attorney General’s office published a notice announcing a public rulemaking hearing to accept oral and written comments on proposed rules implementing SB 26-189. This notice represents the transition from the “initiation” phase to the active “public engagement” phase of the rulemaking process.
What the Hearing Notice Contains: The notice confirms that the Attorney General will hold a public hearing to receive input on rules implementing the new AI law. It initiates the formal public comment period required under Colorado’s Administrative Procedure Act, which must precede the drafting of proposed rules.
Hearing Details: The notice specifies that oral comments will be accepted at the hearing, and written comments will be accepted through a designated period. The hearing will address the key undefined terms identified in previous articles, including the scope of “meaningful human review,” the content and format of adverse outcome notices, and the specific records that must be retained.
Connection to Previous Article: The May 26 article reported that rulemaking had been formally initiated with a notice of intent published on May 25. The public hearing notice is the next procedural step, moving from “initiation” to “public engagement.”
2. Enforcement Remains on Hold – Pending Rulemaking Completion
The Attorney General’s commitment not to enforce the law until after the rulemaking process concludes remains in effect. This enforcement pause, first reported in the May 22 article and confirmed on May 26, is unchanged.
Current Enforcement Status:
| Element | Status |
|---|---|
| Enforcement | ON HOLD – AG will not enforce until after rulemaking concludes |
| Rulemaking | PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE PUBLISHED – May 27, 2026 |
| Effective date | January 1, 2027 (unchanged) |
| Compliance requirement | Businesses should prepare for Jan 1, 2027, but enforcement is paused pending rulemaking |
Practical Implications: The enforcement pause creates a continued safe harbor for businesses. However, with rulemaking now in the public engagement phase, the compliance clock is moving closer to eventual enforcement. Businesses cannot rely on indefinite delay.
3. Public Hearing Will Address Key Undefined Terms
The statute leaves several critical terms and requirements to be defined through rulemaking. The public hearing notice confirms that these areas will be addressed during the rulemaking process.
Key Areas to Be Addressed Through Public Input:
| Area | Current Status in Law | What Rulemaking Will Clarify |
|---|---|---|
| Meaningful human review | Defined broadly: trained individual with authority to override, cannot default to output, must consider evidence | Specific training requirements, documentation standards, deliberation thresholds, what constitutes “considering relevant evidence” |
| Adverse outcome notices | Required within 30 days; specific content “to be determined by Attorney General rules” | Mandatory content, format, delivery methods, timing exceptions |
| Covered ADMT scope | Defined as technology that “materially influences” consequential decisions | Threshold for “materially influences,” specific examples, boundaries, exemptions |
| Record retention | 3-year requirement | Format, accessibility, specific data elements to retain, security requirements |
| Cure period | 60 days; AG may skip for knowing/repeated violations | Criteria for determining “knowing or repeated” violations |
Significance: These rulemakings will determine the practical compliance burden for businesses. The public hearing allows stakeholders – including businesses, consumer advocates, and legal experts – to provide input before proposed rules are drafted.
4. Health Care Exemption and Liability Framework: Unchanged from May 26
The health care exemption and liability framework described in previous articles remain unchanged. The rulemaking process may provide additional clarification, but the statutory provisions are already in effect.
Health Care Exemption (Confirmed): HIPAA covered entities and business associates are exempted from most developer and deployer obligations unless they are using ADMT to make employment-related consequential decisions.
Liability Framework (Confirmed): A comparative fault framework allocates responsibility between developers and deployers. Contracts cannot require one party to indemnify another for the indemnified party’s own discriminatory acts. Any contractual provision that would shield a developer or deployer from liability for its own discriminatory acts is void.
“Meaningful Human Review” Definition (Confirmed): The statutory definition remains: a trained individual with authority to approve, modify, or override the decision, who considers relevant evidence and cannot simply default to the system’s output.
5. xAI Lawsuit Remains Pending
The federal lawsuit from Elon Musk’s xAI, which challenges the original 2024 AI law, remains pending. The court’s stay remains active until 14 days after a ruling on xAI’s preliminary injunction motion.
Current Status:
| Element | Status |
|---|---|
| xAI lawsuit | PENDING |
| Preliminary injunction motion | PENDING – no ruling as of May 28 |
| Court’s stay | ACTIVE – until 14 days after ruling on injunction motion |
| Potential impact on SB 189 | Unknown – could invalidate or modify the law |
Connection to Rulemaking: The pending lawsuit could affect the rulemaking process. If the court invalidates the law or grants a broad injunction, the rulemaking may need to be adjusted or suspended. Businesses should monitor both the rulemaking and the litigation.
Comparison: Before (May 26 Article) and After (May 28 – Current)
| Issue | As of May 26, 2026 (Article) | As of May 28, 2026 (Current) |
|---|---|---|
| Rulemaking status | Formally initiated – notice published May 25 | PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE PUBLISHED – May 27 |
| Public comment period | Not yet open | NOTICE PUBLISHED – comments to be accepted |
| Enforcement | ON HOLD – unchanged | ON HOLD – unchanged |
| Effective date | January 1, 2027 | January 1, 2027 (unchanged) |
| Health care exemption | CONFIRMED – unchanged | CONFIRMED – unchanged |
| Liability framework | CLARIFIED – unchanged | CLARIFIED – unchanged |
| “Meaningful human review” | DEFINED – unchanged | DEFINED – unchanged |
| xAI lawsuit | PENDING – unchanged | PENDING – unchanged |
Rulemaking Timeline and Process
The Attorney General’s rulemaking authority under SB 26-189 follows Colorado’s Administrative Procedure Act. The public hearing notice represents the second phase of a multi-step process.
Rulemaking Phases:
| Phase | Status | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Notice of intent | COMPLETED (May 25, 2026) | Formal initiation of rulemaking process |
| 2. Public hearing notice | COMPLETED (May 27, 2026) | Notice that public comments will be accepted |
| 3. Public comment period | PENDING | Oral and written comments accepted |
| 4. Proposed rules published | PENDING | Draft rules released for additional comment |
| 5. Final rules adopted | PENDING (deadline Jan 1, 2027) | Binding regulatory requirements established |
What the Public Hearing Will Address:
The public hearing will focus on the key undefined terms in the statute, including:
- Defining “meaningful human review” in practice – including training requirements, documentation standards, and deliberation thresholds
- Specifying adverse outcome notice content – including format, delivery methods, and required information
- Clarifying the “materially influences” threshold – including quantitative or qualitative thresholds and examples
- Establishing record retention standards – including format, accessibility, and specific data elements
- Defining “knowing or repeated” violations for cure period exceptions
Arguments For and Against the Rulemaking Process (Updated for May 28)
In Favor of the Public Hearing Notice
- Moves Rulemaking Forward
The public hearing notice represents progress in the rulemaking process. The Attorney General is following the required procedural steps, and stakeholders now have a formal opportunity to provide input. - Allows Stakeholder Input
The public hearing and comment period allow businesses, consumer advocates, and other stakeholders to provide input on the implementing regulations before they are drafted. This input can improve the quality of the final rules. - Provides Transparency
The public notice requirement ensures that the rulemaking process is transparent. Stakeholders can track the process and participate at designated points. - Consistent with Administrative Law Requirements
The Attorney General is following Colorado’s Administrative Procedure Act requirements, ensuring that the final rules will be procedurally valid and less vulnerable to legal challenge.
Against the Rulemaking Process (Updated for May 28)
- Enforcement Remains Delayed
While rulemaking is moving forward, enforcement remains on hold until it concludes. Consumers discriminated against by AI systems still have no immediate recourse. - Rulemaking Timeline Remains Uncertain
The public hearing notice provides a date for the hearing, but the overall timeline remains uncertain. The Attorney General must complete rules by January 1, 2027, but there is no guarantee of completion by that date. - xAI Lawsuit Could Invalidate the Law
The pending xAI lawsuit could invalidate or significantly modify the law before rulemaking is complete. If the court rules against the law, the rulemaking may be rendered moot. - Key Definitions Remain Uncertain
While the public hearing has been noticed, the key definitions that businesses need for compliance planning are not yet final. Businesses must prepare for the January 1, 2027 effective date without knowing the final regulatory requirements.
Remaining Concerns (Updated for May 28)
| Concern | Status |
|---|---|
| Enforcement on hold | AG discretion – could change after rulemaking |
| Rulemaking timeline | Must be completed by Jan 1, 2027 – public hearing noticed but no proposed rules yet |
| xAI lawsuit pending | Could invalidate or modify the law |
| Private right of action | Not included (unchanged) |
| Cure period (60 days) | May allow violators to avoid penalties |
| AG resources for enforcement | Limited – uncertain capacity |
| Consumer awareness | Minimal – most Coloradans unaware of changes |
| Key definitions not yet final | Awaiting rulemaking – public hearing will address |
Current Status (As of May 28, 2026, 14:00 EST)
| Element | Status |
|---|---|
| SB 26-189 signature | COMPLETED (May 14, 2026) |
| Effective date | January 1, 2027 |
| Enforcement | ON HOLD – AG will not enforce until after rulemaking |
| Rulemaking – notice of intent | COMPLETED (May 25, 2026) |
| Rulemaking – public hearing notice | COMPLETED (May 27, 2026) |
| Rulemaking – proposed rules | PENDING |
| Rulemaking – final rules | PENDING (deadline Jan 1, 2027) |
| xAI lawsuit | PENDING – stay remains active |
| Health care exemption | CONFIRMED – HIPAA entities exempted |
| Liability framework | CLARIFIED – comparative fault, no indemnification for own acts |
| “Meaningful human review” | DEFINED – high bar, no defaulting to output |
| Private right of action | NOT INCLUDED |
| Cure period | 60 days (expires Jan 1, 2030) |
What to Watch For
| Event | Expected Timing | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Public rulemaking hearing | To be announced in notice | Will allow oral and written stakeholder input |
| Public comment period | After hearing notice (typically 30-60 days) | Allows written stakeholder input |
| Proposed rules published | After comment period closes | Will reveal AG’s interpretation of key terms |
| xAI preliminary injunction ruling | Unknown – pending | Could invalidate or modify the law |
| Final rule adoption | By Jan 1, 2027 (statutory deadline) | Will establish binding regulatory requirements |
| Enforcement begins | After rulemaking concludes | No firm date – could be well after Jan 1, 2027 |
Why This Matters to the Average Person (Updated for May 28)
The publication of a public rulemaking hearing notice might seem like a technical administrative step, but it matters for several reasons that affect every American who has ever applied for a job, a loan, an apartment, or medical care.
First, the rulemaking process is moving forward. The May 26 article noted that rulemaking had been formally initiated. Now the public hearing has been noticed. The process is advancing through its required procedural steps. The question is no longer if rulemaking will happen, but what the final rules will say.
Second, the public can now provide input. The public hearing notice means that stakeholders – including businesses, consumer advocates, and individual citizens – can provide oral and written comments on the proposed rules. This input can shape the final regulations.
Third, key definitions are still uncertain. The public hearing will address what “meaningful human review” actually means in practice, what information must be included in adverse outcome notices, and what records must be retained. These definitions will determine the practical compliance burden for businesses and the practical protections for consumers.
Fourth, enforcement remains on hold. The Attorney General’s commitment not to enforce until after rulemaking concludes remains in effect. Consumers discriminated against by AI systems still have no immediate recourse. But the clock is now ticking toward eventual enforcement.
Fifth, the xAI lawsuit could change everything. The pending federal lawsuit could invalidate or significantly modify the law before rulemaking is complete. Businesses and consumers should monitor both the rulemaking and the litigation.
The bottom line: The Colorado AI law is moving forward with the rulemaking process now in the public engagement phase. The Attorney General has published a public hearing notice, allowing stakeholders to provide input. The Attorney General remains committed to not enforcing until after rulemaking concludes. Key definitions and requirements will be established through the rulemaking process, which businesses should actively monitor. The pending xAI lawsuit could affect or invalidate the law. The next critical milestones are the public rulemaking hearing, the publication of proposed rules, and the ruling on xAI’s preliminary injunction motion.
Sources
- Colorado Attorney General’s Office (May 27, 2026) – Notice of public rulemaking hearing for SB 26-189
- Colorado Attorney General’s Office (May 25, 2026) – Formal notice of intent to commence rulemaking for SB 26-189, published in Colorado Register and on Secretary of State website
- Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser – Statement on enforcement of SB 24-205 and SB 26-189 (as cited in legal analyses, May 2026)
- Kelley Drye & Warren LLP – Ad Law Access (May 15-22, 2026) – Analysis of signature, enforcement pause, liability provisions, and health care exemption
- Reed Smith LLP – Technology Law Dispatch (May 15-22, 2026) – Updated analysis of SB 189 provisions, “meaningful human review” definition
- National Law Review (May 1-22, 2026) – xAI lawsuit status and enforcement stay
- Colorado General Assembly (May 14, 2026) – Bill signing record for SB 26-189
- Previous article: Colorado AI Law Moves Forward as Attorney General Formally Initiates Rulemaking – Enforcement Remains on Hold Pending Completion (The 5 Ws, May 26, 2026) – Baseline information on formal rulemaking initiation, enforcement pause, health care exemption, liability framework, and “meaningful human review” definition
The 5 W's 
Leave a comment