24-Hour Update: Attorney General Officially Publishes July 21 Virtual Hearing Notice; Registration Required by July 20; Written Comments Due July 10; Enforcement Pause and xAI Lawsuit Unchanged
Published: June 5, 2026
By: Zeeshan Khan
Reading time: 18 minutes
Category: Technology / Consumer Rights / Law
Note: June 5, 2026 – This is an update to the June 2, 2026 article: Colorado AI Law Rulemaking Advances with July 21 Public Hearing – Comment Period Now Open as Enforcement Pause Continues
DENVER – June 5, 2026 – In the 24 hours since the previous update, the Colorado Attorney General’s office has officially published the public rulemaking hearing notice for Senate Bill 26-189, confirming that the hearing will be held virtually on July 21, 2026, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. MT via Zoom. The written comment period remains open through July 10, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. MT. The Attorney General’s commitment not to enforce the law until after rulemaking concludes remains in effect, and the substantive obligations of the law still take effect on January 1, 2027.
This 24-hour update covers the officially published hearing notice, the specific virtual hearing details and registration requirements, the unchanged status of the written comment period, and the continuing pause on enforcement and the pending xAI lawsuit.
The Essentials: Who, What, When, Where, Why, How (Last 24 Hours – June 4–5, 2026)
Who: Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, whose office has now officially published the public rulemaking hearing notice; AI developers and deployers doing business in Colorado; HIPAA-covered entities and business associates (exempted); stakeholders including businesses, consumer advocates, and legal experts; and the court overseeing the pending xAI lawsuit.
What: Three major developments since June 4, 2026:
- The Attorney General has officially published the public rulemaking hearing notice for SB 26-189
- The hearing is confirmed for July 21, 2026, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. MT, to be held virtually via Zoom
- Registration for the hearing is required by July 20, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. MT
When:
- June 4, 2026 – Attorney General’s office officially publishes public rulemaking hearing notice, confirming July 21 date, virtual format, and registration deadline
- June 5, 2026 – Current update
- July 10, 2026 – Written comment deadline (5:00 p.m. MT)
- July 20, 2026 – Registration deadline to provide oral testimony at the hearing (5:00 p.m. MT)
- July 21, 2026 – Public rulemaking hearing (9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. MT)
- 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 virtually via Zoom. The law applies to any entity “doing business in Colorado” that develops or deploys covered automated decision-making technology (ADMT).
Why (Immediate Cause): The Attorney General is required to adopt rules by January 1, 2027, to implement the law. Publishing the official hearing notice and confirming the hearing details are required procedural steps under Colorado’s Administrative Procedure Act, providing stakeholders with formal notice of how and when to participate.
How (Mechanism): The Attorney General has broad rulemaking authority under the new law. Stakeholders may submit written comments electronically through the Attorney General’s website by July 10, 2026. Individuals wishing to provide oral testimony at the July 21 hearing must register in advance by July 20, 2026. After receiving public input, the Attorney General will draft proposed rules, publish them for additional comment, and then adopt final rules.
Specific Updates in the Last 24 Hours (June 4–5, 2026)
1. Public Rulemaking Hearing Notice Officially Published
On June 4, 2026, the Colorado Attorney General’s office officially published the public rulemaking hearing notice for SB 26-189. This represents the formal, legally required notice under Colorado’s Administrative Procedure Act.
Hearing Date and Time Confirmed: The hearing is scheduled for July 21, 2026, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Mountain Time.
Virtual Format Confirmed: The hearing will be held virtually via Zoom. This allows stakeholders from across Colorado and beyond to participate without traveling to Denver.
Registration Required: Individuals wishing to provide oral testimony at the hearing must register in advance. The registration deadline is July 20, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. MT.
What the Hearing Will Address: Consistent with the June 2 article, the hearing will focus on the key undefined terms in the statute, including:
- Standards for “meaningful human review” (training requirements, documentation standards, deliberation thresholds)
- Content and format requirements for adverse outcome notices (including “plain language” standards)
- The “materially influences” threshold for covered ADMT
- Record retention standards (format, accessibility, specific data elements)
- Criteria for determining “knowing or repeated” violations affecting the cure period
Connection to Previous Article: The June 2 article reported that the hearing was scheduled for July 21 but did not specify the format, time, or registration requirements. The June 4 official notice provides these details.
2. Written Comment Period Remains Open – Due July 10, 2026
The written comment period, first reported in the June 2 article, remains open. The deadline for submitting written comments is July 10, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. MT.
How to Submit: Stakeholders can submit comments electronically through the Attorney General’s website. The office has indicated that all timely comments will be considered before proposed rules are drafted.
What Comments Should Address: The comment period is designed to gather input on the key undefined terms identified above. Stakeholders – including businesses, consumer advocates, legal experts, and individual citizens – can provide recommendations on how these terms should be defined in the final rules.
Relationship to Hearing: Written comments are due before the public hearing (July 10 vs. July 21). This allows the Attorney General’s office to review written submissions in advance of the oral hearing.
3. Registration Process Clarified for Oral Testimony
The official notice clarifies that individuals wishing to provide oral testimony at the July 21 hearing must register in advance.
Registration Deadline: July 20, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. MT (the day before the hearing).
Registration Method: The Attorney General’s website provides instructions for registration. Stakeholders should register early to ensure their testimony can be accommodated within the three-hour hearing window.
No Registration for Attendance Only: The notice indicates that individuals may attend the hearing without registering if they do not wish to provide oral testimony. However, specific attendance instructions are provided on the Attorney General’s website.
4. “Commercially Reasonable” Standard Remains Key Focus
As reported in the June 2 article, legal analyses have clarified that the meaningful human review requirement applies only “to the extent commercially reasonable.” This standard remains a key focus of the rulemaking process.
What This Means (Repeated from June 2): This caveat provides significant flexibility for employers with high-volume hiring or automated decision-making processes. As one analysis notes: “In many cases, implementing an automated decision-making technology may not be worth the cost of implementation where the employer must also set up a parallel process for meaningful human review and reconsideration. In that case, employers may have a reasonable argument that compliance with the review right is not ‘commercially reasonable.’”
Rulemaking Role: The public comment period and July 21 hearing will address how “commercially reasonable” should be defined in the final rules. This is expected to be a key point of contention between business and consumer advocates.
5. Enforcement Remains on Hold – Unchanged
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 in subsequent updates, is unchanged.
| Element | Status |
|---|---|
| Enforcement | ON HOLD – AG will not enforce until after rulemaking concludes |
| Rulemaking | PUBLIC HEARING SCHEDULED – July 21, 2026 |
| Written comment deadline | July 10, 2026 |
| Registration deadline | July 20, 2026 |
| Effective date | January 1, 2027 (unchanged) |
6. xAI Lawsuit Remains Pending – Unchanged
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.
| Element | Status |
|---|---|
| xAI lawsuit | PENDING |
| Preliminary injunction motion | PENDING – no ruling as of June 5, 2026 |
| 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.
7. Health Care Exemption and Other Definitions: Unchanged
The health care exemption and the statutory definition of “meaningful human review” remain unchanged from previous articles.
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.
“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. The “commercially reasonable” caveat applies to the implementation of this requirement.
Comparison: Before (June 2 Article) and After (June 5 – Current)
| Issue | As of June 2, 2026 (Article) | As of June 5, 2026 (Current – Last 24 Hours) |
|---|---|---|
| Official hearing notice | Scheduled but not yet published | PUBLISHED – June 4, 2026 |
| Hearing format | Not specified | VIRTUAL (Zoom) – confirmed |
| Hearing time | Not specified | 9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. MT |
| Registration requirement | Not specified | REQUIRED – by July 20, 2026 |
| Written comment deadline | July 10, 2026 | UNCHANGED – July 10, 2026 |
| “Commercially reasonable” standard | Clarified in legal analyses | UNCHANGED – remains key focus |
| Enforcement pause | Active | UNCHANGED – remains on hold |
| xAI lawsuit | Pending | UNCHANGED – pending |
| Effective date | January 1, 2027 | UNCHANGED – January 1, 2027 |
Rulemaking Timeline and Process (Updated for June 5)
The Attorney General’s rulemaking authority under SB 26-189 follows Colorado’s Administrative Procedure Act.
| Phase | Status | Description |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Notice of intent | COMPLETED (May 25, 2026) | Formal initiation of rulemaking process |
| 2. Public hearing notice | COMPLETED (May 27, 2026) | Initial notice that public comments will be accepted |
| 3. Official hearing notice | COMPLETED (June 4, 2026) | Formal notice with date, time, virtual format, registration requirements |
| 4. Written comment period | OPEN – due July 10, 2026 | Electronic submissions accepted |
| 5. Registration deadline | PENDING – July 20, 2026 | Deadline to register for oral testimony |
| 6. Public hearing | SCHEDULED – July 21, 2026 | Oral testimony accepted via Zoom |
| 7. Proposed rules published | PENDING | Draft rules released for additional comment |
| 8. Final rules adopted | PENDING (deadline Jan 1, 2027) | Binding regulatory requirements established |
Key Areas to Be Addressed Through Rulemaking (Updated)
The public comment period and July 21 hearing will address these key undefined terms:
| Area | Current Status in Law | What Rulemaking Will Clarify |
|---|---|---|
| Meaningful human review | Defined broadly; “commercially reasonable” standard applies | 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, “plain language” standards |
| 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 (version IDs, changelogs, notices) |
| Cure period | 60 days; AG may skip for knowing/repeated violations | Criteria for determining “knowing or repeated” violations |
Arguments For and Against the Rulemaking Process (Updated for June 5)
In Favor of the Official Notice and Virtual Hearing
1. Provides Legal Certainty and Formal Notice
The official publication of the hearing notice on June 4 provides the formal, legally required notice under Colorado’s Administrative Procedure Act. Stakeholders now have official confirmation of the hearing date, time, format, and registration requirements.
2. Virtual Format Increases Accessibility
Holding the hearing virtually via Zoom allows stakeholders from across Colorado and beyond to participate without traveling to Denver. This is particularly important for small businesses, consumer advocates, and individuals who may not have the resources to attend an in-person hearing.
3. Clear Registration Process Established
The registration deadline of July 20 provides a clear cutoff for those wishing to provide oral testimony. Stakeholders can plan their participation accordingly.
4. Concrete Timeline Continues to Advance
The official notice confirms that the rulemaking process remains on track. The July 10 written comment deadline, July 20 registration deadline, and July 21 hearing date provide a clear sequence of milestones.
5. “Commercially Reasonable” Standard Provides Flexibility
As noted in the June 2 article, the clarification that meaningful human review applies only “to the extent commercially reasonable” provides important flexibility for businesses, particularly those with high-volume operations. How this standard is defined in rulemaking will be critical.
Against the Rulemaking Process (Updated for June 5)
1. Final Rules Still Not Drafted
The July 21 hearing is for input, not for adoption of final rules. Proposed rules have not yet been published. Businesses must prepare for the January 1, 2027 effective date without knowing final regulatory requirements. The official notice does not change this fundamental uncertainty.
2. 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. The official notice does not accelerate enforcement.
3. Virtual Format May Limit Engagement
While virtual hearings increase accessibility, they may also limit the depth of engagement. Technical difficulties, time limits, and the absence of in-person interaction may make it harder for stakeholders to fully present their concerns.
4. Short Registration Window
The registration deadline of July 20 (the day before the hearing) provides limited time for stakeholders to prepare oral testimony, particularly if they are waiting to see what other stakeholders submit in written comments (due July 10).
5. 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 entire rulemaking process – including the official notice and July 21 hearing – may be rendered moot. Businesses and consumer advocates may be investing time and resources in a process that could be overturned.
6. “Commercially Reasonable” Standard Requires Definition
While the standard provides flexibility, its meaning is itself uncertain. The rulemaking process must define what “commercially reasonable” means in practice, which will be a key point of contention. The official notice does not provide any indication of how the Attorney General intends to define this term.
Remaining Concerns (Updated for June 5)
| Concern | Status |
|---|---|
| Enforcement on hold | AG discretion – could change after rulemaking |
| Rulemaking timeline | Must be completed by Jan 1, 2027 – public hearing scheduled but no proposed rules yet |
| xAI lawsuit pending | Could invalidate or modify the law |
| “Commercially reasonable” standard undefined | Awaiting rulemaking clarification |
| 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 |
Current Status (As of June 5, 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 – official hearing notice | PUBLISHED (June 4, 2026) |
| Rulemaking – public hearing date | SCHEDULED: July 21, 2026 (9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. MT) |
| Rulemaking – hearing format | VIRTUAL (Zoom) |
| Rulemaking – registration deadline | July 20, 2026, 5:00 p.m. MT |
| Rulemaking – written comment deadline | July 10, 2026, 5:00 p.m. MT |
| Rulemaking – proposed rules | PENDING |
| Rulemaking – final rules | PENDING (deadline Jan 1, 2027) |
| xAI lawsuit | PENDING – stay remains active |
| “Commercially reasonable” standard | Clarified in legal analyses – applies to meaningful human review |
| Health care exemption | CONFIRMED – HIPAA entities exempted |
| “Meaningful human review” definition | CONFIRMED – high bar, no defaulting to output; “commercially reasonable” caveat applies |
| Private right of action | NOT INCLUDED |
| Cure period | 60 days (expires Jan 1, 2030) |
What to Watch For
| Event | Expected Timing | Significance |
|---|---|---|
| Written comment deadline | July 10, 2026, 5:00 p.m. MT | Final date for stakeholder input |
| Registration deadline | July 20, 2026, 5:00 p.m. MT | Final date to register for oral testimony |
| Public rulemaking hearing | July 21, 2026, 9:00 a.m. – 12:00 p.m. MT | Oral testimony accepted via Zoom |
| Proposed rules published | After July 21 (likely August-September 2026) | First draft of binding regulations; will define “commercially reasonable” |
| xAI preliminary injunction ruling | Unknown – pending | Could invalidate or modify the law |
| Final rule adoption | By January 1, 2027 (statutory deadline) | Binding regulatory requirements |
| Law effective date | January 1, 2027 | Substantive obligations begin |
| Enforcement begins | After rulemaking concludes | No firm date – could be well after January 1, 2027 |
Why This Matters to the Average Person (Updated for June 5)
The official publication of the 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 now has official, legally required notice. The June 2 article reported that the hearing was scheduled for July 21 but did not have the official notice. Now the notice is published, with specific details: the hearing will be virtual via Zoom, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. MT, and registration is required by July 20. Stakeholders have the official information they need to participate.
Second, the virtual format increases accessibility. Stakeholders from across Colorado and beyond can participate without traveling to Denver. This is particularly important for small businesses, consumer advocates, and individuals who may not have the resources to attend an in-person hearing. Anyone with an internet connection can potentially provide testimony.
Third, the “commercially reasonable” standard remains a key focus. As reported in the June 2 article, legal analyses have clarified that the meaningful human review requirement applies only “to the extent commercially reasonable.” How this standard is defined in rulemaking will determine the practical compliance burden for businesses and the practical protections for consumers. The official notice does not provide any indication of how the Attorney General intends to define this term – that will come in the proposed rules after the hearing.
Fourth, key definitions remain uncertain. While the hearing is scheduled and the official notice is published, the key definitions that businesses need for compliance planning are not yet final. The “commercially reasonable” standard itself requires definition. Businesses must prepare for the January 1, 2027 effective date without knowing the final regulatory requirements. The official notice does not change this fundamental uncertainty.
Fifth, 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, and the official notice confirms that the rulemaking process is moving forward.
Sixth, 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 official notice does not address or resolve this risk.
The bottom line: The Colorado AI law rulemaking process has taken another procedural step forward with the official publication of the public hearing notice on June 4. The hearing is confirmed for July 21, 2026, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. MT, to be held virtually via Zoom. Registration for oral testimony is required by July 20, 2026. The written comment period remains open through July 10, 2026. The Attorney General remains committed to not enforcing until after rulemaking concludes. The pending xAI lawsuit could affect or invalidate the law. The next critical milestones are the July 10 written comment deadline, the July 20 registration deadline, the July 21 public hearing, the publication of proposed rules, and the ruling on xAI’s preliminary injunction motion.
Sources
- Colorado Attorney General’s Office (June 4, 2026) – Official public rulemaking hearing notice for SB 26-189, including July 21, 2026 date, 9:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. MT time, virtual Zoom format, and July 20, 2026 registration deadline
- Colorado Attorney General’s Office (May 31, 2026) – Announcement scheduling public rulemaking hearing for SB 26-189 on July 21, 2026, with written comments due July 10, 2026
- 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
- Cozen O’Connor (June 1, 2026) – “Colorado Replaces Its AI Act with a Narrower Transparency-Focused Law” – Analysis of liability allocation, indemnification voidness, and consumer rights
- Littler Mendelson P.C. (May 14, 2026) – “Colorado Amends its Artificial Intelligence Law, Substantially Reducing Obligations on Employers” – “Commercially reasonable” standard, record retention, cure period
- National Law Review (May 21, 2026) – “Multistage Notices Under Colorado’s Revamped AI Act” – Two-step notice framework details
- 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
- Colorado General Assembly (May 14, 2026) – Bill signing record for SB 26-189
- Previous article: Colorado AI Law Rulemaking Advances with July 21 Public Hearing – Comment Period Now Open as Enforcement Pause Continues (The 5 Ws, June 2, 2026) – Baseline information on scheduled hearing date, comment period, “commercially reasonable” standard, and pending xAI lawsuit
The 5 W's 
Leave a comment