Responsible Innovation and Safe Expertise Act of 2025

• Authority: United States Congress
• Parent authority: Federal government
• Jurisdiction: United States
• Collections: U.S. federal laws
• Most recent activity: Proposed
• Most recent activity date: 2025-06-12

Risk subdomain coverage

Good coverage — Comprehensive governance measures or mitigations with clear procedures relating to the risk subdomain are explicitly described.

• False or misleading information
• Overreliance and unsafe use
• Governance failure
• Lack of capability or robustness
• Lack of transparency or interpretability

Minimal coverage — Brief mention but no specific mitigations, recommendations or governance measures relating to the risk subdomain are described.

• AI system security vulnerabilities
• Fraud, scams, and targeted manipulation
• Competitive dynamics

All other risk subdomains had no coverage in this document.

Risk Coverage Summary

The document has good coverage of approximately 6-7 subdomains, with strong focus on AI system failures and transparency (7.3, 7.4), false information (3.1), fraud (4.3), unsafe use (5.1), competitive dynamics (6.4), and governance frameworks (6.5). Coverage is concentrated in AI system safety, transparency requirements, and professional use domains.

Sector coverage

Good coverage — Comprehensive governance measures or mitigations with clear procedures relating to the sector are explicitly described.

• Professional & Technical Services

Minimal coverage — Brief mention but no specific mitigations, recommendations or governance measures relating to the sector are described.

• Finance & Insurance
• Health Care & Social Assistance

All other sectors had no coverage in this document.

Sectors Summary

The document primarily governs AI use by learned professionals across three explicitly mentioned sectors: healthcare, law (professional services), and finance. The governance framework applies to professional services sectors where licensed practitioners use AI tools in client-facing work.

Legislative Status

Hard Law

Legislative Status Summary

This is proposed federal legislation from the United States Congress with mandatory legal language establishing binding immunity from civil liability, preemption of state law, specific effective dates, and enforceable legal obligations on AI developers.

Actors

Proposer

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor
• Summary: The document is explicitly presented as Congressional legislation with standard bill format beginning 'Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled'

Target

• Entity Types: AI_Developer, AI_User
• Summary: The Act explicitly defines and regulates 'developers' of AI products and establishes requirements for their relationship with 'learned professionals' who use AI in providing professional services. Section 3 provides detailed definitions of both categories.

Enforcer

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor
• Summary: The Act operates through the civil liability system, where courts would determine whether developers meet immunity requirements. Section 4(d) explicitly addresses both federal preemption and preservation of certain state law claims, indicating state and federal courts as enforcers.

Monitor

• Entity Types: AI_Governance_Actor, AI_User
• Summary: The Act does not establish a specific monitoring body. Instead, it relies on learned professionals to assess AI systems and on the civil liability system where potential plaintiffs would monitor and bring claims. The duty to update documentation suggests ongoing self-monitoring by developers.

AI Lifecycle Stages

Lifecycle stages covered by the documents, as defined in the OECD Framework for the Classification of AI Systems

• Plan and Design
• Collect and Process Data
• Build and Use Model
• Verify and Validate
• Deploy
• Operate and Monitor

AI Lifecycle Summary

The document covers all major lifecycle stages from design through operational monitoring. It emphasizes pre-deployment transparency requirements (model cards, specifications) and ongoing post-deployment obligations (updating documentation within 30 days of discovering failure modes or deploying new versions).

Technical Scope

Terms relating to technical scope that are mentioned or implicitly referenced in the document

• AI Models
• AI Systems

Technical Scope Summary

The document uses the term 'artificial intelligence product' throughout without distinguishing between models, systems, or specific AI types. It references established AI definitions from the National AI Initiative Act but does not specify coverage of frontier AI, GPAI, foundation models, or compute thresholds. The focus is on AI products used by learned professionals regardless of technical architecture.