Missouri's House has passed a bill that prohibits anyone developing or deploying AI from advertising or representing that the AI is a mental health professional or is capable of providing therapy, psychotherapy, or mental health diagnoses. It is one of the most specific AI restrictions any US state has passed, and it takes direct aim at the booming AI therapy industry.

But that is not the only state-level AI action this week. Oklahoma's House passed an AI personhood bill by a 94-2 vote. Tennessee's Senate committee recommended a similar bill for passage. These bills would establish legal frameworks for determining whether AI systems can hold any form of legal personhood, a question that sounds philosophical until you realize it determines liability, rights, and who is responsible when AI causes harm.

The State vs. Federal Collision Course

This wave of state legislation is happening while the White House is actively pushing for federal AI rules that would preempt state laws. The Trump administration released its National Policy Framework for AI on March 20, explicitly calling for Congress to override "cumbersome" state regulations. The collision is inevitable: states are not waiting for Washington, and Washington wants them to stop.

Our Take

Missouri got this exactly right. If a human cannot legally claim to be a therapist without a license, an AI should not be able to either. The fact that this even needs legislation tells you how far ahead AI deployment has raced past regulatory common sense.

The AI personhood bills are more complicated and more interesting. A 94-2 vote in Oklahoma tells you this is not partisan. Both parties see the need to define what AI is and is not before the courts are forced to figure it out in real time during a lawsuit. The states that act now will shape the legal framework for AI for decades. The ones that wait will inherit whatever framework the federal government eventually produces, assuming it can produce one at all.

Sources: Lexology, Transparency Coalition, Politico.