> ## Content Index
> Fetch the complete content index at: https://www.theamericanquorum.com/llms.txt
> Use this file to discover other available public pages before exploring further.

# South Carolina Senate Begins Two-Year AI Policy Review
- URL: https://www.theamericanquorum.com/state-news-south-carolina-2026-09-16-b/
- Published: 2026-09-16T22:44:29.000Z
- Updated: 2026-09-16T22:44:29.000Z
- Description: South Carolina’s new special Senate committee opened a two-year AI policy review with testimony on definitions, generative tools and legal risk, creating a public venue for future state rules.
- Author: News Desk
- Tags: State News, South Carolina

South Carolina senators opened a new, two-year review of artificial-intelligence policy on Wednesday, beginning with definitions and expert testimony rather than a proposed bill. The first meeting establishes a state-level process that could shape future rules for government, schools, law enforcement, businesses and consumers.

The [official September 16 agenda](https://www.scstatehouse.gov/agendas/126s16646.pdf?ref=theamericanquorum.com) placed six items before the Special Senate Committee on Artificial Intelligence: introducing the committee, defining its scope, reviewing how other states define and organize AI policy, hearing expert testimony, member discussion and adjournment. The committee is chaired by Sen. Tom Young and includes eight other senators from both parties.

The hearing was held at 10 a.m. in Gressette Building Room 308 and was archived by the General Assembly, according to the Legislature’s [public meeting schedule](https://www.scstatehouse.gov/meetings.php?chamber=S&ref=theamericanquorum.com). That record matters because the committee is operating between regular legislative sessions and has not yet produced legislation for residents or businesses to comply with.

Young said the panel intends to study both current and future uses of AI across state government, education and law enforcement, along with effects on residents and businesses. [WSPA’s report from the hearing](https://www.aol.com/articles/south-carolina-lawmakers-experts-talk-202828000.html?ref=theamericanquorum.com) said South Carolina is among more than a dozen states without a statutory definition of artificial intelligence—a basic question the committee will have to address before writing enforceable standards.

University of South Carolina professors Bryant Walker Smith and Homayoun Valafar were among the witnesses. Valafar, director of the university’s Artificial Intelligence Institute of South Carolina, urged lawmakers to focus on generative AI—the systems behind tools such as ChatGPT, Claude and Copilot—and on policies for appropriate use. The [university describes the institute](https://www.sc.edu/uofsc/posts/2024/09/ai%5Finstitute%5Fhomayoun%5Fvalafar.php?ref=theamericanquorum.com) as a cross-disciplinary research organization intended to support AI work across academic fields.

Questions from senators illustrated the committee’s broad starting point. Members asked about legal responsibility when automated systems cause unforeseen harm, the categories of AI, autonomous vehicles and whether advanced systems could reach forms of sentience. The witnesses also discussed bias and unpredictability. Those exchanges were exploratory; they did not amount to findings or consensus.

The practical consequence for South Carolinians is a new venue for policy development, not an immediate regulatory change. The committee expects to meet periodically over roughly the next two years. Its public agenda lists AIcommittee@scsenate.gov for contact, giving residents, companies, researchers and public agencies a channel for comments while the scope is still being set.

Several decisions remain open: whether the state needs one definition across its code or different definitions for separate uses; how rules should distinguish high-risk systems from ordinary software; whether agencies need procurement or disclosure standards; and when existing consumer-protection, civil-rights or criminal laws are sufficient. The committee must also decide which questions require legislation and which can be handled through agency policy.

Wednesday’s meeting therefore marks the beginning of a fact-finding process. The panel has identified the institutions and policy areas it will examine, but it has not endorsed a regulatory model, set compliance dates or recommended penalties. Any binding statewide requirements would still need to be written, debated and passed through the General Assembly.