Democrats Weaponize AI Regulation to Push DEI

"Colorado Senate Bill 24-205, currently under challenge in federal court by Elon Musk's xAI and the Department of Justice, was sold to Coloradans as a shield against "algorithmic discrimination." This is a term that, in the law's own usage, does not mean what an ordinary citizen would assume. It does not refer to an AI system designed to disadvantage a person on the basis of race or sex. It means an AI system whose outputs, in the aggregate, fail to mirror the demographic ratios the state finds politically congenial."

"Under the regime envisioned by the bill, developers and deployers of "high-risk" AI-the kind used in mortgage lending, college admissions, and hiring-must produce disclosures, perform impact assessments, and take "reasonable care" to prevent unintentional disparate impact. They must, in short, look at the outcomes of their models and, where the outcomes deviate from preferred racial targets, intervene to bring them into line."

"It's an age-old tale of the same civil rights regime that has existed in America since the late 1960s: state-mandated racial quotas, dressed up in the language of anti-discrimination. The most damning feature of Colorado's bill is its carveout for discrimination in circumstances approved by the state."

"Per the law's text, algorithmic discrimination can only be allowed if it is intended to "increase diversity" or "redress historic discrimination." The same conduct that would expose a company to liability if undertaken for one purpose-disadvantaging minorities-becomes legally protected when undertaken for another-disadvantaging whites."

Colorado SB 24-205 would require developers and deployers of “high-risk” AI systems used in areas like mortgage lending, college admissions, and hiring to provide disclosures, conduct impact assessments, and take “reasonable care” to prevent unintentional disparate impact. The law defines “algorithmic discrimination” as failure of AI outputs, in the aggregate, to match demographic ratios the state prefers, rather than intentional discrimination based on race or sex. It would push outcome-based racial adjustment into a regulatory framework familiar from civil rights law. The bill also includes a carveout allowing discrimination when intended to “increase diversity” or “redress historic discrimination,” potentially protecting conduct that would otherwise be unlawful.

Read at The American Conservative