news briefAI in CourtsAI GovernanceAI Hallucinations

California governor signs SB 574, putting lawyer and arbitrator AI duties into statute

Signed 30 Sep 2026 as Chapter 858, California's SB 574 writes generative-AI duties for attorneys and arbitrators into statute from 1 Jan 2027.

Edited and verified by SafeLegalAI

Researched with AI assistance · sources verified by SafeLegalAI · How this was made ↓

California Governor Gavin Newsom approved Senate Bill 574 on 30 September 2026, and the Secretary of State chaptered it the same day as Chapter 858, Statutes of 2026. The California statute sets out what an attorney who uses generative artificial intelligence must and must not do, and adds a citation-verification rule for papers filed in California courts.

SB 574 (Chapter 858, Statutes of 2026) adds Business and Professions Code §6068.1, which bars attorneys from delegating the practice of law to generative AI and requires them to take reasonable steps to verify AI outputs, including citations. It also amends Code of Civil Procedure §128.7 and adds §1282.1 for arbitrators. As a non-urgency bill, it takes effect on 1 January 2027.

What does the chaptered text say?

The chaptered text matches the version enrolled on 4 September; the Legislature’s status page records 21 August 2026 as the last amendment. SafeLegalAI described the enrolled text on 7 September.

Section 1 adds §6068.1(a)(2): “An attorney shall not delegate the practice of law to generative artificial intelligence.” The section does not define “delegate”. The Governor’s 30 September release describes the provision as prohibiting lawyers “from fully handing over core legal work, such as drafting briefs or providing legal judgment, to AI”. That wording is the Governor’s gloss and does not appear in the statute.

The citation rule is a new §128.7(b)(2)(A), inserted by section 3: “A brief, pleading, motion, or any other paper filed in any court shall not contain any citations that an attorney responsible for submitting the pleading has not personally verified, including any citation provided by generative artificial intelligence.”

The amendment also renumbers §128.7(b). The four certification conditions become paragraph (1), and paragraph (2) becomes the citation rule. Subdivision (d)(1) keeps its existing wording: monetary sanctions “may not be awarded against a represented party for a violation of paragraph (2) of subdivision (b)”. Under the law in force today, that cross-reference points to the legal-contentions condition. From 1 January 2027 it points to the citation rule.

Section 5 adds §1282.1, under which an arbitrator “shall not delegate any part of their decisionmaking process to any generative artificial intelligence tool”. Section 4 adds §180, which directs the Judicial Council to “publicly revisit, and revise as necessary” Standard 10.80 on generative AI in the courts. Section 2 changes the State Bar’s certification programme for alternative dispute resolution providers, making complaint proceedings private and confidential.

Where it sits in SafeLegalAI’s record

SafeLegalAI’s register of US legislation on AI in courts, evidence and legal services holds eight bills in its attorney-AI-use lane (dataset version 0.1.3, built 8 September 2026). Before 30 September, the only one in force was Louisiana’s Act 250 of 2025, which concerns AI-manipulated evidence. California’s AB 2811 (2024) and Washington’s SB 6073 (2024) died. Four New York certification bills were in committee.

In California, the State Bar’s proposed AI amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct still need adoption by the California Supreme Court. The SafeLegalAI record showed no adoption when last verified on 21 September 2026.

What follows from enactment?

  • Courts enforce the citation rule through the existing §128.7(c) procedure. A sanctions motion cannot be filed if the challenged paper is withdrawn or corrected within 21 days of service, or any other period the court prescribes.
  • Section 6068.1 has no penalty provision of its own.
  • No deadline is set in §180 for the Judicial Council’s review of Standard 10.80.

Record: California SB 574 (Chapter 858, Statutes of 2026) in the regulation tracker; California SB 574 (2025–26) in the legislation register, where the row still shows the bill as enrolled and will be updated to chaptered. Proposed California AI rule amendments.

Sources