Most workers don't know that software exists which claims to read their mood from their face, voice or body signals. In California, their employer can no longer use it.
What Changed
On September 30, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed laws "aimed at protecting workers from the threats of artificial intelligence, including potential job losses and workplace surveillance," the Associated Press reports.
According to AP, the laws:
Ban AI mood-reading. Employers can't use AI "to predict a worker's emotional state by using their biometric data."
Ban firing by algorithm. Employers can't rely "on AI to decide to fire someone."
Require written notice. If AI is responsible for mass layoffs, workers must be told in writing.
Note the precise wording of the second one. It targets reliance. AI can still be part of a workplace. It just can't be what the decision to fire someone rests on.
A Fight Over a Word
Newsom also signed an executive order requiring state agencies to keep using the term "artificial intelligence" instead of "super intelligence," which AP reports President Trump recently ordered U.S. diplomats to use.
It sounds like a quibble. Our read: it's not. "Artificial intelligence" frames the technology as a tool people build and control. "Super intelligence" frames it as something beyond us. Governments choosing their vocabulary are choosing their posture.
Two Answers to Who Sets the Rules
AP reports that Trump said top tech leaders signed a voluntary accord to "self-police" AI development. Newsom, at an hourlong event with reporters, criticised the absence of comprehensive federal AI regulation:
"We have to do a lot more in the absence of federal leadership."
He left open the possibility of a special legislative session. Earlier this month he also signed a law requiring operators of AI chatbots to perform risk assessments before release.
Newsom framed the worker laws this way:
"AI should expand opportunity, not come at the expense of workers and families."
Why It Matters for Families
Today's teenagers will apply for their first jobs in workplaces where AI already screens applications, sets schedules and monitors productivity. California's laws mark three lines that are worth explaining at home:
Your feelings aren't data your boss gets to mine. Emotion-recognition tools are contested science. Being judged on a machine's guess about your mood is exactly what California just ruled out.
A person should own big decisions about you. "Rely on AI to decide" is a useful phrase for teens to know. When a decision matters, ask who actually made it.
Rules depend on where you live. For now, these protections stop at California's border. That's a civics lesson as much as a tech one.
A conversation starter: ask your teen whether they'd want to know if an AI helped decide whether they got a job, or lost one. Then ask why.
The Part Worth Remembering
These are narrow laws. That's their strength. They don't try to regulate all of AI. They pick three specific harms, mood-reading, algorithmic firing and silent AI layoffs, and draw a line. The next fight is whether other states, or Washington, draw the same lines.
Source: Associated Press, Sophie Austin, "Newsom signs laws to protect workers from risks of AI," September 30, 2026. https://apnews.com/article/newsom-california-trump-ai-journalism-bills-1aa4935e3ee79519ae8b2458b2b9ebc1
Quotations verbatim from AP. Law details are AP's summary. The interpretation of the terminology order and the family guidance are ours.
Disclosure: drafted with Claude, made by Anthropic.
Want practical AI guidance for parents and educators every week? Subscribe: https://www.aibyage.com/?modal=signup&utm_source=beehiiv&utm_medium=newsletter