Connecticut · Public Act 26-15

Connecticut's AI law starts October 1. The tool stops being a defense.

From October 1, 2026, using an automated employment-related decision technology is not a defense against a discrimination complaint. In plain language: if a tool with AI in it helps decide who gets hired, promoted or let go, you can soon no longer answer a complaint by pointing at the vendor.

Plain-language summary, not legal advice. Statute: Connecticut Public Act 26-15 (Substitute SB 5), with sections effective from October 1, 2026 through January 1, 2028.

Days until 1 October
The non-defense provision arrives first.Sections 13 and 14 need no filing, no registration and no form. They simply remove an argument. What replaces it is evidence — and evidence takes longer to build than a policy does to write.
What changes on October 1

Three things, and only three

Most coverage of this act is vague about dates. These are the provisions carrying an October 1, 2026 effective date, each with the section it comes from.

Sections 13–14 · from Oct 1

The tool is not a defense

Use of an automated employment-related decision technology “shall not be a defense against a complaint alleging a discriminatory practice.” It lands in both discrimination statutes — sections 46a-60 and 46a-81c.

Section 26 · from Oct 1

Layoff notices ask about AI

An employer serving a federal WARN notice on the Labor Department must disclose whether the reduction relates to artificial intelligence or another technological change. The answer becomes a state record.

Sections 7–12 · from Oct 1

The framework and the enforcer

Definitions, developer information duties, disclosure to workers and trade-secret protections — enforced by the Attorney General as an unfair trade practice. No private right of action.

The half-sentence most summaries stop at

Evidence of testing is expressly admissible

The same sentence that removes the defense continues: the commission or court “may consider evidence of anti-bias testing or similar proactive efforts to avoid the discriminatory practice, including, but not limited to, the quality, efficacy, recency and scope of such testing or efforts” and the results of them.

Read plainly: Connecticut closed one door and left another open. Testing you cannot evidence is worth nothing here. Testing you can date, scope and show a response to is expressly something a court may weigh — which is why this is an evidence problem rather than a policy-writing problem.

Read the sections, not the summaries

What has not changed yet

A great deal of published commentary says Connecticut’s AI notice duties begin in October 2026. They do not. Getting this wrong in either direction is expensive: panic in September, or complacency until 2028.

  • 1 OCT 2027The written notice duty. Sections 9 and 10 are effective October 1, 2026, but the duty inside each attaches to a deployer who, on or after October 1, 2027, deploys an automated employment-related decision technology.
  • 1 JAN 2027AI companion rules. Disclosure, crisis-response and minor-protection duties under sections 4 to 6.
  • 31 DEC 2027The cure period. A discretionary 60-day cure applies to violations occurring on or before December 31, 2027, where the Attorney General determines the violation can be cured.

If your adviser’s dates disagree with these, check them against the chaptered text — it is public, free, and shorter than the commentary about it.

Does it apply to you?

Two questions decide it

No employer-size exemption has been identified anywhere in the act — the words “exempt”, “employs” and “or more employees” do not appear in its 74 pages. Plan on the basis that being small is not a shield here.

Question one

Do you employ people in Connecticut?

Staff, applicants, or contractors in the state. Where you are incorporated matters less than who your decisions affect.

Question two

Does a tool with AI in it touch an employment decision?

Screening, ranking, scheduling, performance scoring, promotion or termination — used as a substantial factor in the decision.

Both yes? Sections 13 and 14 will apply to you, and you should be able to show your work. One yes? Worth documenting anyway — your board will ask. Neither? You still need an AI policy, just not this one.

What replaces the defense

It is an evidence problem, not a form

Connecticut has not asked employers to publish a policy. It has asked them to be able to show their work. Four records do that, and none of them is a document you write once.

Know what you are running

An inventory naming every tool that touches an employment decision, what it does, what data it uses, and a single accountable owner — a person, not a department.

In GOVERNBOX: the AI Use Case Log, with a staff intake portal that lets your whole workforce report the tools nobody officially approved — at no per-seat cost.

Assess before you deploy

A record that someone looked at what the tool could do to a person before it was switched on, and what was done about what they found.

In GOVERNBOX: a seven-section impact assessment per use case that creates risk register entries automatically on completion.

Log what was decided

What the technology decided, about whom, and when — kept as a record rather than a screenshot, and retained.

In GOVERNBOX: the Decision Log, with subject identifiers hashed at the boundary so the record never carries the raw identifier.

Show the human who reviewed it

A named reviewer, what they considered, and whether they held the authority to change the outcome. A rationale that can be rewritten afterwards is worth nothing.

In GOVERNBOX: a review queue where a completed review is immutable — corrections go through withdraw-and-review-again, leaving both records standing.
Where to start

The Connecticut crosswalk, line by line

Connecticut SB 5 is a dedicated framework in the control library with eleven authored controls across four domains, included from Starter as part of the U.S. States jurisdiction. Enable the jurisdiction and every member statute comes with it — including the ones passed after you subscribe.

Take the free scorecard →
Your coverage, sample
Employment decision technology75%
Decision records & human review40%
Workforce displacement notice25%
Sample result. Placeholder for a real product screen.
What the library actually contains

eleven controls, four domains

Every clause the platform writes cites one of these. The system retrieves controls; it never invents them — which is what makes the output defensible to an auditor rather than merely plausible.

CT-AEDT-003Non-Defense Affirmation for Employment Discrimination
CT-AEDT-001Point-of-Interaction and Pre-Decision AEDT Notice
CT-AEDT-002AEDT Data Categories, Sources, and Assessment Disclosures
CT-AEDT-004Technological Workforce Displacement Notice
CT-CMP-001Harm Detection Protocols and Deception Prevention
CT-CMP-002Periodic and Interval AI Interaction Disclosure
CT-CMP-003Minor Protection Guardrails and Parental Management Controls
CT-FRN-001Anonymous Catastrophic Risk Reporting Channels
CT-FRN-002Whistleblower Non-Retaliation and Executive Reporting
CT-GEN-001Synthetic Content Watermarking and Provenance Signaling
CT-SUB-001Subscription-Based AI Service Term Transparency
Common questions

What people ask about Public Act 26-15

No. Sections 9 and 10 are effective October 1, 2026, but the duty inside each of them attaches to a deployer who, in the statute's words, "on or after October 1, 2027" deploys an automated employment-related decision technology. What takes effect in October 2026 is the non-defense provision in sections 13 and 14, the layoff-notice requirement in section 26, and the framework and enforcement provisions in sections 7 to 12. Getting this wrong in either direction is expensive: panic in September, or complacency until 2028.

Find out whether this applies to you

Fifteen questions, about ten minutes, free. No account and no sales call. You get a banded score and a named list of the gaps behind it.

This page is a plain-language summary of Connecticut Public Act 26-15 (Substitute SB 5), with sections taking effect between October 1, 2026 and January 1, 2028. It is not legal advice, and GOVERNBOX.ai does not promise a regulatory outcome. Check your obligations with counsel. GOVERNBOX.ai is a product of Gradient Descent LLC, an independent commercial company that is not affiliated with, endorsed by, or sponsored by the State of Connecticut or any U.S. government agency.