In the days following last week’s attack on Temple Israel in West Bloomfield, Michigan Attorney General Dana Nessel and state lawmakers are speaking out against antisemitism.

“Hate has no place here in Michigan,” said Nessel.

This is the message heard loud and clear on Monday by Dana Nessel and state lawmakers after last week’s attack on Temple Israel.

“This is not just a Jewish problem. This is a problem for all of us as Americans,” state Sen. Jeremy Moss said. 

“It felt like an attack on every Jewish person in Michigan. This is intolerable, and people need to stand up and say enough is enough,” said Oakland County Treasurer Robert Wittenberg.

According to Nessel, antisemitism and hate crimes against the Jewish population in Michigan are on the rise, making it even more crucial to have preventative tools in place.

“Prevention begins by better understanding the problem we face. This is a wakeup call,” said state Rep. Noah Arbit.

In Michigan, a law targeting hate crimes is already in effect. State leaders are also working to lock down funds to allow security training at other houses of worship, like the staff at Temple Israel received weeks before the attack.

“These investments matter. The training the teachers and staff received was implemented, security protocols were followed, and emergency responders were able to coordinate quickly,” said state Rep. Samantha Steckloff. “Over the past several years, the Michigan legislature has appropriated about $19 million in security funding, and I want you all to know that I have already begun those conversations in finding out where appropriations can lead in this year’s budget.”

These lawmakers say now is the time to stand up and speak out against hate.

“What we can do is train parents, teachers, coaches and peers to recognize the signs of radicalization and intervene before it becomes violence. What we can do is fund programs that deter hate and target violence in the first place,” Arbit said. 

Nessel is also encouraging houses of worship to work with law enforcement to update their safety plans.

“I implore every single house of worship, every religious school, organization that represents a minority community to please contact their local or sheriff’s department to begin or to update your safety plan. Not just for the worst-case scenario as we’ve seen in far too many places of worship, but for all emergencies,” said Nessel.

• Michigan lawmakers have debated a wide array of artificial intelligence regulations, although few have become law so far.
• Current proposals include banning companion chatbots for minors and creating security plans for AI platforms.

Policymakers eager to address how artificial intelligence should be regulated in Michigan — from governing how AI companies can operate in the state to determining what types of programs companies can use to monitor employee productivity — have plenty of ideas but haven’t been able to see all of their proposals into law, yet.

Measures to regulate AI were introduced in all 50 states last year, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures. While experts point out that innovation in AI generally occurs at a faster rate than state governments can propose and enact new policies, there’s a wide selection of proposals on regulating AI currently floating through the Michigan Legislature. 

Michigan has made some headway in enacting AI regulation laws, including prohibiting the use of AI to create sexualized “deep fake” images. In 2025, the state created penalties, including fines and potential jail time, for using AI platforms to make fake or false images portraying a sexual act or intimate part of someone’s body. Lawmakers broadly supported the proposals, creating the law which passed the state Legislature by wide partisan margins.  

Supporters of the pornographic deepfake ban said it would protect Michiganders from sexual exploitation. 

And in 2023, Michigan became just the fifth state to require disclosing when AI is used in certain political campaign materials. If a campaign used AI in an ad or social media post within 90 days of an election, it would be subject to fines for each violation. The measure aims to prevent AI-driven misinformation during election season.

Here’s a look at other AI policies that have been proposed but not yet voted on:

Guardrails for AI companies  

One policy measure would set rules for the companies that operate major AI programs. 

House Bill 4668, introduced by Rep. Sarah Lightner, R-Springport, would require operators to create security features intended to mitigate risks. These measures include creating and implementing a publicly accessible safety and risk protocol. Developers would be tasked with using the protocol to manage “critical risks” associated with the AI model.  

Critical risks would be considered a scenario where an AI model was used to carry out any incident that could lead to the death or injury of 100 people or $1 million in property damage.  

Any company that spends $100 million on its AI model annually, or spends $5 million to start operations, would be subject to the requirements.

Advocates for Lightner’s bill say it’s important to place guardrails around AI, given its rapid evolution. 

“Every technologic innovation has the potential for both good and harm,” said Felix De Simone, director of advocacy group Pause AI during a Sept. 11 House Judiciary Committee hearing on the bill. “It’s the responsibility of lawmakers to keep people safe from these harms while ensuring innovation moves in the public interest.” 

Opponents of the bill, which include officials from different chambers of commerce around the state, warn it could stifle innovation from AI developers and dissuade them from operating in Michigan. Randy Gross, senior director of legislative affairs for the Michigan Chamber, said during the Sept. 11 hearing the group acknowledges a need for AI guardrails but believes the federal government should take the lead.  

“Handling these issues at the state level is going to create a patchwork approach that will inevitably lead to some inconsistencies in application that will likely lead to some contradictions in how you regulate this issue,” Gross said.  

While the House Judiciary Committee reported the bill during the Sept. 11 hearing, it has not received a vote from the full chamber, yet. A companion bill, HB 4667, would make it illegal to develop an AI system to commit a crime.  

Use of AI to monitor workers 

Labor advocates have warned of the possibility of AI being used for surveillance in the workplace. Since remote work boomed for many in traditional office jobs during the COVID-19 pandemic, the availability of AI surveillance programs for workers has escalated. These can include programs to monitor keystroke logging, facial recognition and even when a remote worker steps away for a bathroom break, according to the Aspen Policy Academy, a Bay Area organization that trains prospective lawmakers.

Some labor advocates argue this is an invasion of privacy. 

“Invasive, unnecessary and unethical surveillance techniques (are) increasingly used to track the body movements and even facial expressions of employees continuously,” Rep. Penelope Tsernoglou, D-East Lansing, said at a Feb. 23 news conference. 

In February, House Democrats proposed legislation that would define how AI could be used in the workplace when it comes to how employers can deploy AI to monitor workers’ productivity.  

House Bill 5579, introduced by Tsernoglou, would ban employers from using AI programs to make decisions related to setting wages, hiring and firing workers, and tracking facial patterns of workers. Workplaces would still be allowed to use AI to screen large pools of candidates. Employers would also need to get written consent from workers when using an AI tool to monitor productivity.  

Michigan basketball March Madness predictions