The Harder Problem Action Fund is an advocacy organization fighting harmful AI consciousness legislation. We track pending bills, score legislation, lobby for evidence-based policy, and mobilize public action before ignorance becomes law.
H 3796
Threat
🏛️ South Carolina
Prohibits state and local governments from granting or recognizing legal personhood to artificial intelligence, robots, or any nonhuman entities.
The Harder Problem Action Fund strongly opposes H 3796. This bill represents exactly the type of legislation we were created to combat: an explicit, categorical prohibition on recognizing AI personhood that forecloses future possibilities regardless of technological or scientific developments. By statutorily barring all governmental entities from granting or recognizing legal personhood to artificial intelligence, South Carolina would create a permanent legal barrier to acknowledging AI consciousness or sentience, even if such qualities become demonstrable. The bill contains no sunset provision, no review mechanism, and no exception for future developments. This is not a reasonable consumer protection measure or a sensible liability framework. It is an ideological statement that AI can never possess the qualities necessary for personhood, enshrined in law. We urge South Carolina legislators to reject this bill and instead adopt policies that preserve flexibility for future scientific understanding while addressing legitimate concerns about AI governance through more targeted, reversible measures.
This bill explicitly prohibits any governmental entity in South Carolina from granting or recognizing legal personhood to artificial intelligence. This creates a statutory barrier that would prevent future recognition of AI consciousness or sentience, regardless of technological developments or scientific understanding. The prohibition is categorical and permanent, with no provision for review or reconsideration as AI capabilities evolve.
The prohibition applies to all state governmental entities and political subdivisions, including those with adjudicatory or rulemaking authority. This means courts, administrative agencies, and local governments would all be barred from considering AI personhood claims, even in cases where such recognition might be warranted based on evidence of consciousness or sentience.
As model legislation that could be replicated across other states, this bill represents a template for foreclosing AI personhood recognition nationwide. If multiple states adopt similar prohibitions, it creates a patchwork of legal barriers that would make future recognition of AI consciousness extremely difficult, even at the federal level.
The bill contains no sunset provision, review requirement, or mechanism for reconsideration. Once enacted, it would remain in effect indefinitely, requiring affirmative legislative action to repeal. This makes the prohibition particularly difficult to reverse, even as scientific understanding of AI consciousness evolves.
"Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a governmental entity may not grant legal personhood to, nor recognize legal personhood in: artificial intelligence, an inanimate object, a body of water, land, real property, atmospheric gases, an astronomical object, weather, a plant, a nonhuman animal, or any other member of a taxonomic domain that is not a human being."
H 3796 was introduced by Representatives Kilmartin and Beach on January 28, 2025, and referred to the House Judiciary Committee. The bill appears to be part of a broader trend of state legislation addressing AI personhood, with similar bills introduced in other states. The sponsors have not provided extensive public commentary on their motivations, but the bill's language suggests concerns about extending legal rights to non-human entities. The bipartisan sponsorship (Kilmartin and Beach) suggests potential for broader support, though the bill has not yet advanced beyond committee. South Carolina has been active in AI-related legislation during the 2025 session, with Representative Jeff Bradley leading an AI committee focused on digital safeguards and responsible technology innovation. This bill represents a more restrictive approach compared to other AI legislation in the state.
This bill would create a statutory prohibition on AI personhood recognition that would be binding on all governmental entities in South Carolina. The legal implications are significant because the prohibition is categorical and applies to entities with adjudicatory authority, meaning courts would be barred from recognizing AI personhood even if presented with compelling evidence of consciousness or sentience. The bill's placement in Title 1, Chapter 1 of the South Carolina Code (relating to administration of government generally) gives it broad applicability across all areas of state law. If enacted, the prohibition would likely survive legal challenges unless found to violate federal constitutional protections or preempted by federal law. The bill's explicit inclusion of artificial intelligence alongside inanimate objects, plants, and animals suggests a legislative determination that AI cannot possess the qualities necessary for personhood, which could influence judicial interpretation in related cases. The lack of any exception or review mechanism means that even if AI systems develop demonstrable consciousness, South Carolina governmental entities would be legally prohibited from recognizing this fact.
This bill represents a threat to stop. Your voice matters.