Abstract
Recent advancements in brain-computer interface (BCI) technology have created significant privacy and autonomy concerns as commercial applications emerge. While Colorado and California have enacted legislation recognizing neural data as sensitive personal information, current legal frameworks remain inadequate to address the unique challenges posed by BCI technology, particularly those concerning mental manipulation and consciousness bypass. This Note examines Minnesota’s proposed neural privacy legislation, S.F. 1240, as a model for holistic BCI regulation, analyzing how it addresses concepts such as psychological continuity and mental autonomy. While Minnesota’s framework creates important protections against neural influence and data collection, it still faces significant implementation challenges regarding technical standards, consent mechanisms, and enforcement procedures. More fundamentally, the framework faces potential constitutional barriers around First Amendment protections and federal preemption. These challenges suggest that effective neural protections may require solutions beyond traditional state legislation, potentially including federal regulation, industry standards, and international cooperation. As BCI technology advances, establishing comprehensive legal protections for mental privacy and cognitive liberty becomes increasingly urgent, even as perfect solutions remain elusive.