New legislation in Texas and Louisiana mandates greater transparency when using artificial intelligence in clinical care, shifting AI oversight from compliance to front-line patient interactions.
Texas and Louisiana have moved to place clearer disclosure duties around artificial intelligence in clinical care, signalling that AI governance is no longer confined to procurement or compliance teams. The new rules are aimed at everyday patient interactions, from diagnostic support and treatment decisions to ambient transcription, and they make transparency a front-line obligation for health providers.
In Texas, Senate Bill 1188 permits clinicians to use AI for diagnostic purposes, but only within their professional scope and with continued human review of AI-generated records. The law also requires patients to be told when AI is being used for diagnosis. According to legal commentary published by JD Supra and guidance from the Texas Academy of Family Physicians, that disclosure may be oral or written, but providers must decide who gives it, when it is made and how it is recorded in the workflow.
A separate Texas measure, House Bill 149, known as the Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act, adds a broader disclosure rule when AI is used in treatment. The notice must be clear, conspicuous and written in plain language, and it must reach the patient or guardian by the date of service, or as soon as reasonably possible in an emergency. Legal analyses from JD Supra, the Texas Academy of Family Physicians and other Texas law firms say this will likely force updates to intake forms, patient portal language, consent documents and electronic health record prompts.
Texas has also tied its AI legislation to biometric privacy. Under the state’s updated rules, organisations using tools that process voiceprints, facial geometry, fingerprints or iris data may need to consider separate consent and retention controls. That point matters for ambient listening, facial recognition and other systems that can move beyond simple documentation into identity-related processing, according to guidance from GT Law.
Louisiana has taken a narrower but operationally significant approach. House Bill 475, enacted as Act 649 and due to take effect on 1 August 2026, requires a health professional to give a verbal warning before any recording device, software or service is used to capture part of an appointment or treatment for AI transcription. Legal summaries from Agg and Recording Law say the rule is designed to ensure that patients know in advance when an encounter will be recorded for automated transcription.
Taken together, the two states’ measures point to a wider regulatory pattern in health care: AI tools may be adopted quickly, but disclosure and oversight must keep pace. For hospitals, clinics and physician practices, the practical response is likely to be an inventory of AI systems, revised staff scripts, training for clinical and non-clinical teams, and clearer vendor terms covering data handling, security and support for compliance.
Disclaimer: This content is intended for informational purposes only. Readers are advised to exercise their own judgement, conduct due diligence, or consult a qualified expert before acting on any information provided.
