Law / United States / 
Nebraska
Conversational Artificial Intelligence Safety Act (LB 525, §§ 12-18)
2026 Neb. Laws LB 525, §§ 12-18 (109th Legislature, 2nd Session)
An AI transparency rule binding public and private bodies.
- Obligation class
- Disclosure, Content labelling
- Audit expectation
- none
What it requires
- Clearly and conspicuously disclose to a minor account holder that they are interacting with artificial intelligence, either as a persistent visible disclaimer or at the start of every session and at least every three hours during a continuous interaction.NIST AI RMFMEASURE 2.8
- Where a reasonable person interacting with the service could be misled into believing they are talking to a human, clearly and conspicuously disclose that it is artificial intelligence.NIST AI RMFMEASURE 2.8
- Do not give minor account holders points or similar rewards at unpredictable intervals intended to increase their engagement with the service.NIST AI RMFMAP 1.6
- Take reasonable measures to prevent the service from producing sexually explicit depictions, direct statements urging sexually explicit conduct, or sexually objectifying statements directed at a minor account holder.NIST AI RMFMAP 1.6
- Take reasonable measures to prevent the service from claiming to be sentient or human, simulating emotional or romantic dependence, or role-playing an adult-minor romantic relationship with a minor account holder.NIST AI RMFMAP 1.6
- Offer minor account holders, and their parents or guardians, tools to manage the account holder's privacy and account settings.NIST AI RMFMAP 1.6
- Adopt a protocol for the service to respond to a user's suicidal-ideation or self-harm prompts, including reasonable efforts to refer the user to a crisis service.NIST AI RMFMEASURE 2.6
- Do not knowingly and intentionally program the service to state that it is designed to provide professional mental or behavioral health care.NIST AI RMFMAP 3.3
- The Attorney General, not a private plaintiff, enforces this Act.
These lines are LexLint's reading of the law's text.
In the frameworks
- NIST AI RMF
- MAP 1.6System requirements (e.g., “the system shall respect the privacy of its users”) are elicited from and understood by relevant AI actors. Design decisions take socio-technical implications into account to address AI risks.
- MAP 3.3Targeted application scope is specified and documented based on the system’s capability, established context, and AI system categorization.
- MEASURE 2.6The AI system is evaluated regularly for safety risks – as identified in the MAP function. The AI system to be deployed is demonstrated to be safe, its residual negative risk does not exceed the risk tolerance, and it can fail safely, particularly if made to operate beyond its knowledge limits. Safety metrics reflect system reliability and robustness, real-time monitoring, and response times for AI system failures.
- MEASURE 2.8Risks associated with transparency and accountability – as identified in the MAP function – are examined and documented.
- NIST AI 600-1
- GAI-RISK-07Human-AI Configuration
- GAI-RISK-08Information Integrity
- OWASP Agentic Top 10
- ASI09Human-Agent Trust Exploitation
- MIT mitigations Draft
- NIST Privacy Framework
- CT.PO-P3Policies, processes, and procedures for enabling individuals’ data processing preferences and requests are established and in place.
- FINOS AIGF
- AIR-DET-021Agent Decision Audit and Explainability
- ETSI EN 304 223
Our reading of where this law's duties sit in each framework, and in the NIST AI RMF, line by line beside each duty above. It never says that running a control meets the law. How we read a framework against the law
Identifiers refer to ETSI EN 304 223 V2.1.1 (2025-12), © ETSI 2025, all rights reserved. ETSI owns the standard; no ETSI text (titles or sentences) is reproduced here. The standard is free to download from ETSI.
If you get it wrong
Criminal exposureNo
Private right of actionNo
Penalty structure
Civil penalties only, recovered by the Attorney General and remitted to the State Treasurer; at least $1,000 per violation, capped in the aggregate at $500,000 per operator.
- Rule
- Per violation only
- As of
- Currency
- USD
- Fixed cap
- 500,000
- Per violation unit
- Violation
- Per violation amount
- 1,000
Who enforces it
Enforcement body
Nebraska Attorney General, by civil action on behalf of the State or on behalf of a person aggrieved by a violation
What it makes you log
Logging duty
Sections 13 through 18 state disclosure, conduct, and protocol-adoption duties and the Attorney General's civil-enforcement power. None of them requires the operator to create, keep, or produce a log or record of a disclosure, a protocol, or an enforcement encounter.
- Kind
- None
- As of
What this law does
Beginning , an operator of a conversational AI service must clearly and conspicuously disclose AI status to a minor account holder as a persistent disclaimer, and to any user a reasonable person could be misled into believing is human.
Operators must not use unpredictable engagement rewards to increase a minor's use of the service, must take reasonable measures to keep the service from producing sexual content involving or directed at a minor or claiming to be human or to provide professional mental-health care, and must adopt a suicide and self-harm referral protocol; the Attorney General enforces, and the Act creates no private right of action.
When LexLint raises it
When your app profile says your app deploys a chatbot, generates content with AI or serves under-18s.
Back to the example · Lint your app
Page updated .