Older users become the next front in state companion-chatbot rules

Advocates are pushing state legislatures for safeguards aimed at older adults who use AI companions, according to a Pluribus News report from 20 October that was carried by the Arizona Capitol Times. Until now, most companion-chatbot legislation has focused on children and teenagers.

What we know

Pluribus News reported that versions of the proposed legislation were introduced this year in Arizona and six other states: Illinois, Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, South Carolina and Vermont. We could not access the full report, so the specific measures the advocates want are not set out here.

The state effort runs alongside federal activity. In July, Senators Jim Justice and Mark Kelly introduced the bipartisan Senior Chatbot Protection Act (S. 5117). Kelly's office says it would require clear disclosures from AI chatbot and voice-assistant providers and bar companies from presenting a chatbot as human or a response as coming from a licensed professional. State attorneys general would be able to enforce it. The bill has been referred to the Senate Commerce Committee.

Arizona has a recent history on the issue. A Multistate.ai legislative update recorded that Governor Katie Hobbs vetoed an earlier companion chatbot bill, HB 2311. More broadly, the Future of Privacy Forum counts 124 chatbot-related bills introduced in 37 states during 2026, 13 of them enacted, most of them aimed at minors.

Why it matters

Older adults are an attractive market for companion products. Isolation is widespread, and voice-first assistants suit users who are less comfortable with screens. Some studies have linked regular use to lower loneliness scores. Advocates' concerns are similar to those raised over teenagers: emotional dependence, manipulation and, for this group, financial exploitation.

For operators, extending protections to seniors is a harder compliance problem than protecting minors. Age verification can identify a child, but there is no simple check for cognitive vulnerability. Disclosure rules, limits on persuasive or urgent prompts about money or health, and audit trails are the more likely tools. Companies selling into care homes or through family members should expect contract and procurement terms to pick up these requirements before any statute does.

What to watch

Whether the seven states' bills return in the 2027 sessions, and whether S. 5117 moves out of committee.