AB-2575 Health care services: artificial intelligence

What happened

AB 2575’s retained proposal would protect a worker providing direct patient care from employer retaliation or discrimination based solely on the worker’s override of, or reliance on, clinical decision-support output while exercising professional judgment within the appropriate scope of practice. Workers would retain duties concerning the standard of care, independent judgment, scope and applicable policies; a policy demanding deference to the system would not qualify as one of those preserved duties. A worker could complain to the Labor Commissioner, whose retaliation determination would not decide malpractice liability or professional discipline. These provisions remained proposed as of September 26.

A separate proposed Civil Code provision would prevent a defendant that developed, modified, selected or deployed a clinical decision-support system from asserting that a health professional’s or worker’s failure to override its output was a superseding cause that severed the defendant’s liability. Other affirmative defenses, causation and foreseeability evidence, comparative-fault evidence and reasonable-precaution evidence would remain available. The provision excludes specified professional-negligence actions against licensed or certified direct-care professionals. The proposal therefore would not automatically establish a vendor’s liability, eliminate all defenses or excuse a worker from clinical responsibilities.

Why it matters

The proposed worker-rights and liability provisions affect different decisions: employment responses to clinical judgment and defenses in system-related harm claims.

Sources

• AB-2575 Health care services: artificial intelligence, bill historyOfficial · California Legislature · 2026-08-31 · Source review 2026-09-20
• AB-2575 Health care services: artificial intelligence, current bill text (09/04/26 - Enrolled)Official · California Legislature · 2026-09-04 · Source review 2026-09-10