# 119-s-2997: Right to Override Act

119-s-2997, Right to Override Act, is a 119th Congress bill sponsored by Sen. Markey, Edward J. [D-MA] (D-MA); status introduced; PRIA reads it as touching household money (as of 2026-07-10).

- Canonical: https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-s-2997
- As of: 2026-07-10
- Plain-text twin of the page above; the HTML and this file carry the same facts.

## Facts
- Bill: 119-s-2997
- Congress: 119
- Title: Right to Override Act
- Status: introduced
- Introduced: 2025-10-09
- Sponsor: Sen. Markey, Edward J. [D-MA] (D-MA)
- Cosponsors: 2
- Policy area: Health
- Touches household money: yes
- Last recorded action: 2026-07-10

## Summary

**Preserve clinicians' independent clinical judgment over AI clinical decision‑support outputs.** This bill would require covered health care entities to ensure AI/CDSS informs but does not replace clinician judgment, allow timely overrides, and protect clinicians who override consistent with policy.

## Cosponsors (2)

- Sen. Blumenthal, Richard [D-CT] (D-CT), 2025-10-09T00:00:00.000Z
- Sen. Smith, Tina [D-MN] (D-MN), 2025-10-15T00:00:00.000Z

## Provisions PRIA read

- Who is covered by this law: benefit, high. If enacted, the bill would define who the law covers and what counts as AI clinical decision support. It would say covered employers include any business that pays health workers and is engaged in commerce. It would list many workers as health care professionals, including home health aides and hea…
- Employer rules on AI use and overrides: benefit, medium. If enacted, employers who use AI for clinical decisions would need a written policy saying AI cannot replace clinicians' judgment. Health care professionals would be allowed to override AI outputs in a timely way when needed. Employers would have to train staff, accept clinician feedback, and set u…
- Malpractice and state law unchanged: benefit, low. If enacted, the bill would not protect clinicians from malpractice claims when they override an AI tool. It would also not override State laws or collective bargaining agreements. States and unions would keep their current powers and remedies.
- Stronger enforcement and employer penalties: mixed, medium. If enacted, federal and state agencies could investigate and penalize covered entities for violations. Workers could sue in federal court for actual damages, statutory damages, injunctive relief, and attorney fees. Statutory damages per violation would range from $5,000 to $20,000 for adverse-emplo…

## Related bills

- 119-s-5071: Children's Safe Welcome Act of 2026
- 119-s-2819: Head Start for America's Children Act
- 119-s-5283: Momnibus Act
- 119-s-1507: Agriculture Resilience Act of 2025
- 119-s-3990: PrEP Access and Coverage Act of 2026
- 119-s-2823: FAMILY Act

## Sources
- [119-s-2997 on Congress.gov](https://www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/senate-bill/2997)

## Related
- [119-s-5071: Children's Safe Welcome Act of 2026](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-s-5071)
- [119-s-2819: Head Start for America's Children Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-s-2819)
- [119-s-5283: Momnibus Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-s-5283)
- [119-s-1507: Agriculture Resilience Act of 2025](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-s-1507)
- [119-s-3990: PrEP Access and Coverage Act of 2026](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-s-3990)
- [119-s-2823: FAMILY Act](https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-s-2823)
- [All bills in Congress](https://policyrisk.com/legislation)

Source: PRIA, https://policyrisk.com/legislation/119-s-2997 (as of 2026-07-10).