AI Regulation Tracker / State law
Missouri SB 1019 would bar AI from being marketed as a therapist, enforced as consumer fraud
A passed Missouri bill on the governor's desk would make it an unlawful practice to advertise an AI system as a mental health professional or therapy provider. It is enforced through the state's consumer-fraud statute, not a licensing board.
Missouri has taken a different route to regulating AI in mental health than most states that have acted this year. Instead of amending a licensing statute or creating a new health regulator, its legislature folded the restriction into SB 1019, an omnibus health bill, and attached enforcement to the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act, the state's consumer-fraud law. The bill was truly agreed and finally passed on May 15, 2026 and has been delivered to Governor Mike Kehoe. It is not yet law. If the governor signs it, the provision takes effect August 28, 2026.
What the provision says
The operative language is narrow and specific. According to the bill, no person who develops or deploys artificial intelligence may advertise or represent to the public that the AI is, or is able to act as, a mental health professional, or that it can provide therapy services, psychotherapy services, or a mental health diagnosis. The restriction is aimed at the representation, meaning the claim a company makes about what its product is. It reaches developers and deployers alike, so a firm that markets or distributes a third-party model under its own name is covered, not only the party that built it.
Why the consumer-fraud framing matters
The enforcement mechanism is the part professionals should study. A violation is defined as an unlawful practice under the Merchandising Practices Act. That places AI therapy claims in the same category as false advertising and deceptive sales tactics, and it hands enforcement to the Missouri attorney general rather than a health-licensing board. This design has practical consequences. Consumer-fraud statutes turn on whether a public statement was deceptive, not on whether a specific patient was harmed. A company can be exposed on the strength of its marketing alone, before any user files a complaint about a bad outcome.
Penalty note
Reporting on the bill describes civil penalties of $10,000 for a first violation and $20,000 for each subsequent violation, with the attorney general authorized to bring a civil action and individuals permitted to report suspected violations to that office. These figures track the penalty structure of the Merchandising Practices Act. Readers should treat the specific dollar amounts as reported rather than independently confirmed here, and should consult the enrolled bill text for the controlling numbers before relying on them.
What it does not do
The provision is not a general ban on AI in mental health. It does not prohibit building a wellness chatbot, offering a mood-tracking app, or deploying an AI tool inside a licensed clinical setting under professional supervision. What it forbids is the claim. A product can exist. It cannot be sold to the Missouri public as a therapist or as a source of psychotherapy or diagnosis. Companies that already describe their tools as support aids, journaling companions, or informational resources, and that avoid clinical labels, are closer to compliant than those whose marketing leans on the language of licensed care.
The cross-state signal
Missouri is one of several states moving on AI and mental health in 2026, and its approach is worth watching because the consumer-fraud pathway is portable. Most states already have a deceptive-practices statute and an attorney general with authority to enforce it. A firm operating nationally cannot assume that a product framed as a therapist in its home market is safe elsewhere. The Missouri model shows how a state can reach AI marketing claims without waiting for a dedicated AI statute, using consumer-protection tools that are already on the books.
For now, the honest status is that SB 1019 is a passed bill awaiting signature. The prudent assumption for any company selling AI mental health features into Missouri is that the standard will apply from August 28, 2026, and that the safest response is to fix the claims before then.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does Missouri SB 1019 change about AI mental health tools?
It makes it an unlawful practice to advertise or represent to the public that an AI system is, or can act as, a mental health professional, or that it can provide therapy, psychotherapy, or a mental health diagnosis. The restriction targets the marketing claim, and it applies to both developers and deployers of the AI.
Who is affected by this?
Any person or business that develops or deploys AI and markets mental health or therapy features to Missouri consumers, including chatbot and companion-app makers and the marketing and compliance staff who write their public claims. Firms that distribute a third-party model under their own brand are covered as deployers.
Is SB 1019 in force now?
No. It was passed on May 15, 2026 and delivered to the governor, and it is not yet signed. If Governor Kehoe signs it, the provision takes effect August 28, 2026. Until signing, it is a passed bill awaiting action, not enacted law.
How is it enforced, and what are the penalties?
Enforcement runs through the Missouri Merchandising Practices Act, the state consumer-fraud law, with the attorney general bringing civil actions and individuals able to report violations. Reporting describes civil penalties of $10,000 for a first violation and $20,000 for each subsequent violation, figures that should be treated as reported and checked against the enrolled bill text.
How is this different from a licensing-board ban?
A licensing approach regulates who may practice a profession. Missouri instead treats a false or misleading AI therapy claim as deceptive marketing, so liability can turn on the public statement itself rather than on a documented patient harm or an unlicensed-practice finding.
Sponsored Training
Browse the full AI Regulation News tracker
Informational analysis for working professionals, not legal advice. Confirm how any rule applies to your situation with qualified counsel.