Which state legislatures currently have active bills proposing bans on carbon dioxide removal (CDR) technologies?

1. What the sources actually cover: tech and AI, not CDR

The materials you provided are centered on state-level technology policy—AI regulation, surveillance pricing, data privacy and workplace tech—and do not mention carbon dioxide removal (CDR) or bills to ban it. Examples include mid‑year reviews of state tech legislation that catalog AI rules and surveillance-pricing proposals ^{[1] [3]}. Legal analyses note broad activity in statehouses—hundreds of bills and new laws on AI and privacy—but none of the supplied snippets reference CDR policy ^{[4] [2]}.

2. Strong state-level AI momentum that could obscure non-tech topics

Several pieces emphasize the intensity of state legislative activity in tech: one roundup says state lawmakers proposed “hundreds” of AI bills in the first half of 2025, and another counts nearly 1,000 AI-related bills across 2025 sessions ^{[1] [2]}. This level of focus on AI and adjacent digital policy may mean coverage and trackers are concentrated on those areas, which can make searches for unrelated topics (like CDR bans) in such collections come up empty ^{[1] [2]}.

3. Specific state actions documented in these sources (AI, privacy, surveillance)

The sources list concrete state measures: for example, California’s Assembly passed surveillance-pricing legislation (AB 446) and various states moved on AI transparency, chatbot disclosure or sector-specific AI rules ^{[3] [5]}. They also document initiatives to block state AI regulation at the federal level—e.g., a U.S. House provision to bar states from enacting AI laws for 10 years—showing the intensity and politicization of this policy area ^{[6] [7]}.

4. Limits of the available reporting on your question

Because none of the supplied search results mention carbon dioxide removal or bills banning it, I cannot identify any states with active CDR ban proposals using these sources; stating otherwise would violate the constraint to cite only provided materials (available sources do not mention state CDR bans). If you want an accurate list, we need sources that specifically track environmental or climate‑policy legislation at the state level rather than tech trackers (not found in current reporting).

5. How to get the information you asked for (recommended next steps)

For a definitive answer, consult state legislative trackers and environmental policy coverage: state legislative websites, climate policy databases (e.g., state environmental agency bill trackers, the National Conference of State Legislatures’ environment section), and news outlets that cover climate legislation. The materials you supplied—law‑firm briefs and tech policy outlets—are useful for AI/privacy but do not cover CDR. The current package therefore cannot confirm any active CDR-ban bills (not found in current reporting).

6. Why this matters: context and potential agendas

The supplied sources reveal an explicit agenda focus: many outlets and analyses are following the surge in AI and data-privacy laws—sometimes criticizing federal moves to preempt states—so their coverage priorities naturally center on tech ^{[2] [6]}. That editorial and analytic focus can produce blind spots: climate or CDR policy may be undercovered in these sources even if active in some legislatures ^[4]. If a policymaker or industry group wanted to shift attention away from climate regulation, emphasizing tech stories would serve that aim; however, available sources do not allege such a coordinated agenda here ^{[1] [2]}.

If you’d like, I can (a) search for state environmental/climate trackers and bills specifically about carbon dioxide removal (please supply additional sources or allow a new search), or (b) produce a short list of likely places to check (NCSL environment page, state legislature bill searches, environmental NGOs tracking state climate legislation).