Key Takeaways:
- The 2026 Florida Legislative Session is expected to focus on artificial intelligence, with at least 32 bills already filed
- Florida has already established a strong foundation of accountability for AI through existing laws and regulations
- The state’s process-neutral laws provide penalties for harmful outcomes regardless of the tool or technology used
- Recent legislation has filled gaps in regulation, such as requiring transparency disclosures for AI-generated political advertisements
- The Florida Legislature should build upon the existing foundation of consumer protection rather than abandoning it
Introduction to AI Regulation
As the 2026 Florida Legislative Session approaches, artificial intelligence is expected to be a major focus among policymakers in Tallahassee. Driven by Governor Ron DeSantis’ calls for greater regulation, the legislature has already filed at least 32 bills ranging from embracing the new technology to banning it. However, before legislators weigh these proposals, they should review the protections Florida has already put in place. As Leo Schoonover, Chief Information Officer at the Department of Health, urged the state to "set the floor, not the ceiling" when it comes to AI regulation.
Existing Framework
Florida has already set a strong "floor" of accountability for AI, in some cases without even trying. The state’s existing legal framework already addresses many of the concerns people have about AI, as preexisting laws tend to be process-neutral, providing penalties for harmful outcomes regardless of the tool or technology used. As Schoonover noted, "set the floor, not the ceiling," implying that the state should focus on establishing a foundation of accountability rather than trying to regulate every aspect of AI. This approach has allowed Florida to establish a strong foundation of consumer protection, without needing to create new laws specifically for AI.
Accountability Principles
The same accountability principles apply across licensed professional practices, such as law and medicine. The Florida Bar testified that lawyers who cite AI-hallucinated cases already face disciplinary action under longstanding ethics rules that predate the technology. Similarly, health care providers confirmed that physicians remain fully liable for any incorrect AI-assisted diagnosis or documentation under existing malpractice standards. As one expert noted, "physicians have strong reason to actively verify AI outputs rather than defer to them without scrutiny." This approach discourages over-reliance on AI without requiring AI-specific regulation.
Closing Regulatory Gaps
Where regulatory gaps have arisen, the Legislature has moved to close them. Since 2022, the Legislature has reaffirmed that willfully promoting an altered sexual depiction of someone without their consent is illegal, most recently with the passage of "Brooke’s Law" last Session. In 2024, the Legislature passed requirements for political advertisements to include a transparency disclosure when content is created using AI. These efforts extend the same process-neutral logic to new contexts, keeping the focus on the harm itself rather than the technology used to commit it. As Turner Loesel, a policy analyst, noted, "Florida has taken Schoonover’s approach without even realizing it. Through decades of process-neutral law, Florida has built a strong floor of consumer protection, while recent legislation has filled gaps where needed."
The Way Forward
The upcoming Legislative Session provides an opportunity for Florida to build upon its existing foundation of consumer protection. As Loesel noted, "the floor is already there. All that’s left is deciding whether to trust it." The Legislature should focus on building upon the existing framework, rather than abandoning it. By doing so, Florida can continue to provide a strong foundation of accountability for AI, while also allowing the technology to develop and improve. As Schoonover urged, the state should "set the floor, not the ceiling," and allow the technology to evolve while maintaining a strong foundation of consumer protection.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Florida has already established a strong foundation of accountability for AI through its existing laws and regulations. The state’s process-neutral laws provide penalties for harmful outcomes regardless of the tool or technology used, and recent legislation has filled gaps in regulation. The Legislature should build upon this foundation, rather than abandoning it, and focus on providing a strong foundation of consumer protection for AI. By doing so, Florida can continue to be a leader in the development and regulation of AI, while also protecting the rights and interests of its citizens. As Loesel noted, "Florida has taken Schoonover’s approach without even realizing it," and the state should continue to follow this approach in the upcoming Legislative Session.
Turner Loesel: Florida’s AI laws are stronger than you think