Laws & Statutes › MN › MN-SF-1856
SF-1856
MN · State · USA
MN
USA
● Pending
Proposed Effective Date
2025-08-01
Minnesota S.F. No. 1856 — A bill for an act relating to health insurance; prohibiting the use of artificial intelligence in the utilization review process; authorizing enforcement by the attorney general; amending Minnesota Statutes 2024, sections 62M.02, by adding a subdivision; 62M.09, subdivision 3; proposing coding for new law in Minnesota Statutes, chapter 62M.
Categorically prohibits the use of artificial intelligence in any part of the utilization review process in Minnesota, including review, evaluation, determination, and appeals. Requires the physician making an adverse determination to attest in writing that AI was not used. Any adverse determination made in violation of the prohibition is automatically null and void, notwithstanding existing limitations on remedies under section 62M.14. Enforceable by the Minnesota Attorney General under section 8.31. The bill amends existing utilization review statutes in Chapter 62M and applies to utilization review organizations operating in the state.
Passage Likelihood
Low
Chamber No passage
Committee No action
Majority party Yes
Bipartisan No
Prior session None
Legislative History
2025-02-24 introduced Introduction and first reading
2025-02-24 committee referral Referred to Commerce and Consumer Protection
2026-02-26 committee referral Withdrawn and re-referred to Judiciary and Public Safety
2026-03-18 committee referral Comm report: Amended, No recommendation, re-referred to Commerce and Consumer Protection
Mapped Requirements
HC-01 Healthcare AI Decision Restrictions
Official Sources
Full Text ↗
Entry Last Reviewed
2026-03-28
AI generated
Summary

Categorically prohibits the use of artificial intelligence in any part of the utilization review process in Minnesota, including review, evaluation, determination, and appeals. Requires the physician making an adverse determination to attest in writing that AI was not used. Any adverse determination made in violation of the prohibition is automatically null and void, notwithstanding existing limitations on remedies under section 62M.14. Enforceable by the Minnesota Attorney General under section 8.31. The bill amends existing utilization review statutes in Chapter 62M and applies to utilization review organizations operating in the state.

Enforcement & Penalties
Enforcement Authority
The attorney general may enforce section 62M.20 under Minnesota Statutes section 8.31, which grants the attorney general broad authority to investigate and bring civil actions for violations. Enforcement is agency-initiated. Section 8.31 also provides for private enforcement by individuals injured by a violation, though the bill itself does not independently create a private right of action — the private enforcement pathway derives from the existing section 8.31 framework. Any adverse determination made in violation of the AI prohibition is null and void regardless of enforcement action.
Penalties
The bill does not specify damages or penalties directly. Enforcement under Minnesota Statutes section 8.31 makes available injunctive relief, civil penalties, and other remedies provided under that section. Any adverse determination made using AI in violation of the prohibition is declared null and void, which operates as an automatic remedy for affected enrollees independent of enforcement proceedings.
Who Is Covered
Compliance Obligations 2 obligations · click obligation ID to open requirement page
HC-01 Healthcare AI Decision Restrictions · HC-01.1 · Deployer · Healthcare
Minn. Stat. § 62M.20(a)-(b)
Plain Language
Utilization review organizations are categorically prohibited from using artificial intelligence in any part of their operations — including initial review, clinical evaluation, coverage determinations, and appeals. This is broader than the typical HC-01.1 requirement that AI not be the 'sole or primary basis' for adverse determinations; Minnesota bans AI use entirely. Any adverse determination made in violation is automatically null and void, overriding existing limitations on remedies in section 62M.14. The definition of AI incorporates the federal definition at 15 U.S.C. § 9401, which is broad and technology-neutral.
Statutory Text
(a) The use of artificial intelligence is prohibited in utilization review. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, a utilization review organization is prohibited from using artificial intelligence in any part of its review, evaluation, determination, or appeals processes. (b) Notwithstanding section 62M.14, any adverse determination made in violation of this section is null and void.
HC-01 Healthcare AI Decision Restrictions · HC-01.2 · DeployerProfessional · Healthcare
Minn. Stat. § 62M.09, subd. 3(a)-(b), (f)
Plain Language
Every adverse clinical determination must be reviewed and made by a licensed Minnesota physician in the same or similar specialty as the treating provider. The bill adds a new affirmative attestation requirement: the reviewing physician must attest in writing that AI was not used in the utilization review process. Any adverse determination made in violation of the attestation requirement is automatically null and void. This creates both a documentation obligation (written attestation) and a substantive compliance obligation (ensuring AI was in fact not used). The existing physician-reviewer requirements in paragraphs (a) and (b) are pre-existing law; the new obligation is the written AI-non-use attestation in paragraph (f).
Statutory Text
(a) A physician must review and make the adverse determination under section 62M.05 in all cases in which the utilization review organization has concluded that an adverse determination for clinical reasons is appropriate. (b) The physician conducting the review and making the adverse determination must: (1) hold a current, unrestricted license to practice medicine in this state; and (2) have the same or similar medical specialty as a provider that typically treats or manages the condition for which the health care service has been requested. (f) The physician must attest in writing that artificial intelligence was not used in the utilization review process. Notwithstanding section 62M.14, any adverse determination made in violation of this paragraph is null and void.