The Colorado AI Act (SB24-205) is effectively frozen just weeks before its June 30, 2026 effective date, following a stay in enforcement of the law by a Magistrate Judge in the District of Colorado on April 27, 2026.

Background

By way of background, on April 9, xAI filed suit in federal court seeking to enjoin the law on First Amendment, Dormant Commerce Clause, due process, and equal protection grounds, arguing that the Act’s algorithmic discrimination provisions would compel developers to reengineer model outputs to conform to state-preferred viewpoints. Two weeks later, the Trump DOJ intervened—the first time the federal government has moved to invalidate a state AI law under the President’s December 2025 executive order. xAI and the Colorado Attorney General subsequently filed a Joint Motion to Vacate Scheduling Conference and Suspend Case Deadlines and Stipulation to Temporarily Stay Enforcement (the “Motion”). The magistrate assigned to the case granted the Motion, which has the effect of preventing enforcement of the law by the Colorado Attorney General. The order also requires xAI to submit a motion for preliminary injunction and, if necessary, file an amended complaint, within 28 days after final adoption of rulemaking implementing the AI Act or any legislation that may replace or amend the AI Act.

Legislative Replacement Efforts

Due in part to pressure from the Trump Administration, there is a legislative replacement effort underway. Governor Polis’s AI Policy Work Group released a proposed framework on March 17 that would substantially narrow the Act’s scope to be closer to the CCPA’s automated decision-making technology regulations, add a 90-day cure period, and push the effective date to January 1, 2027. The effort is coming down to the wire. The legislature adjourns May 13, and no bill has been formally introduced. While Colorado can pass a bill in as few as three days, it is unclear whether the political dynamics that have stymied reform through two prior legislative cycles and a special session make nothing certain.

AG Weiser’s Non-Enforcement Commitment

Also relevant is AG Philip Weiser’s voluntary commitment not to enforce the AI Act. In the joint court filing, Weiser’s office stated it will neither promulgate implementing rules nor enforce the Act until after the legislative session concludes and any resulting rulemaking is complete. Given that rulemaking hasn’t even begun, this pushes any realistic enforcement timeline well past June 30 regardless of the litigation outcome—meaningful breathing room for companies that have been building compliance programs around the Act’s impact assessment and disclosure requirements.

Stay tuned to Privacy World for more on this and other developments.

Disclaimer: While every effort has been made to ensure that the information contained in this article is accurate, neither its authors nor Squire Patton Boggs accepts responsibility for any errors or omissions. The content of this article is for general information only, and is not intended to constitute or be relied upon as legal advice.

Stay Ahead on Consumer Privacy News

Not a subscriber yet? Subscribe here to be among the first to receive timely updates on the fast-moving world of data privacy, security, and innovation—delivered straight to your inbox.

Looking for deeper insights and expert analysis? You can also subscribe here to our privacy attorneys’ marketing communications for thought leadership and rich content when you need a more comprehensive perspective.