For legislators and legislative staff

Legislative toolkit

The Fiduciary Commons Framework is a constitutional and legislative architecture governing government handling of digital identity, citizen data, and algorithmic decision-making. It proposes three foundational model statutes designed for introduction in state legislatures, each addressing a distinct layer of the problem.

Three layers, three statutes

VIDA mandates the identity infrastructure: citizen-controlled credentials, privacy-preserving verification, and a constitutional prohibition on surveillance-capable architectures. PDTA establishes the enforceable fiduciary duties that govern every subsequent use of citizen data within that infrastructure, with a private right of action allowing citizens to enforce those duties directly in court. GAAFA ensures AI and algorithmic systems making decisions about citizens respect the same constitutional constraints, with tiered governance, pre-deployment assessments, and the right to algorithmic explanation.

The architecture is designed so that all three reinforce each other, and the constitutional protection is strongest when all three are enacted together.

What enactment commits you to

One statute: VIDA alone

Governs identity infrastructure. Requires citizen-controlled credentials and prohibits surveillance-capable architectures. A state that enacts VIDA has built the technical foundation, but has not yet imposed enforceable fiduciary duties on how government uses the data that identity verification generates.

Two statutes: VIDA and PDTA

Adds enforceable fiduciary duties with a private right of action. Government actors owe duties of loyalty, care, and confidentiality regarding citizen data, and citizens can enforce those duties directly in court. This is the core constitutional architecture, but it does not yet reach AI and algorithmic decision-making.

All three: VIDA, PDTA, and GAAFA

The complete constitutional architecture. Every layer is covered: identity infrastructure, data governance, and algorithmic accountability. This is the configuration that provides the strongest constitutional protection and the most complete legislative response to the problems the framework identifies.

Why this framework, why now

The Supreme Court agrees the problem exists

The Supreme Court's 2026 decision in Chatrie v. United States categorically rejected durational thresholds for Fourth Amendment protection and described unchecked government surveillance as a "virtual panopticon." The Court identified the constitutional problem. This framework provides the legislative solution. Read more →

Utah's proof of concept

Utah has enacted identity-layer legislation (SB 260 and SB 275) through its SEDI initiative that converges substantially with VIDA's architecture. Utah is in conversation with multiple states considering joining the SEDI Consortium. A state that enacts SEDI-model legislation has built the foundation; enacting the framework's three foundational statutes completes the constitutional architecture.

Published analysis

IAPP: "The ground shifts: Chatrie's impact on data governance beyond the Fourth Amendment" (July 2026)

StateTech: "The case for constitutionally grounded AI and data architecture" (May 2026)

Questions about introduction, drafting assistance, or committee testimony: legislative@fiduciarycommons.com