TechTonic Justice

🚨 When it comes to AI, it’s not always about the technology. It’s about who’s using it. TechTonic Justice’s Founder and President Kevin De Liban explains how the real problem with AI is when institutions use automated systems to control access to basic needs without accountability. As humans, we know that AI didn't decide on its own. It was programmed to do so, and an institution chose to use it to make that decision for us. When institutions use AI systems to decide to cut Social Security, deny medical treatment, stop Medicaid, or slash wages, people suffer. So, people and communities should have the power over how the technology is used. TechTonic Justice believes each of us should have the power to decide where we live, work, and learn. Automated systems have no role to play in that. Want to learn more? Hit the follow button and stay tuned for TTJ’s upcoming research & recommendations for how policymakers can govern AI when it touches basic human needs.

🇺🇸 American voters are ready to play hardball when it comes to regulating AI – and policymakers should take note. TTJ and Data for Progress surveyed over 1,000 likely voters about how far they’re willing to go to restrict AI being used in high-stakes parts of life. The main takeaway? Bold protections against AI are the way to go. An overwhelming number of people from all political parties wanted outright bans on AI making consequential decisions about our healthcare, benefits like Social Security and Medicaid, housing, and employment. They also strongly supported immediate: ➡️ off-switches ➡️ proof of safety before deployment ➡️ meaningful penalties  ➡️ and community boards with real or legal authority Think this sounds like too many regulations? Think again. When asked what worried people most about a policy package that included all of those restrictions, over twice as many people across parties said it didn't go far enough. This data should serve as a green light for policymakers to stop underestimating what voters will support, and start holding those who use and abuse automated systems accountable. Our full briefing for policymakers coming soon.

An algorithm didn't deny that claim. An insurer did, working from a state contract that gives the company a financial incentive to refuse your healthcare. The oversight gap is documented. In 2024 the US Government Accountability Office reviewed 5 state Medicaid managed care programs serving children: • 4 out of 5 used AI to automate prior authorization decisions • 0 out of 5 had reviewed a representative sample of denials, or used data to assess whether the full scope of those decisions was appropriate What does that mean? The states have *no idea* whether the denials were correct. The figures speak for themselves. According to Health and Human Services' (HHS) inspector general, Medicaid managed care plans denied 12.5% of prior authorization requests in 2023, with some companies denying as many as 41%. It's not about the tech - it's about procurement and contracting. States decide what to buy, what to require of vendors, what to audit, and what happens when a system gets it wrong. And when states are mandated to comply with a strict timeline by federal law (HR 1) to apply changes to who now gets covered, even states who wanted to update vendor contracts are locked into antiquated systems with acceptable error rates written into their contracts. The silver lining? Those are all things a legislature can change. TechTonic Justice has direct experience fighting back – and winning – against AI harms and unjust automated decision-making outcomes. Follow and stay tuned for our new policy framework, coming soon!

The AI industry wants weak guardrails. But American voters want something bolder. TTJ surveyed over 1,000 likely voters on AI regulations. The main takeaway? Regardless of political party, most agreed that AI policy needs real teeth. 72% of respondents supported all the regulations we asked about, including off switches, mandatory proof of safety before release, meaningful penalties, bans on high-stakes uses, and community boards with real or legal authority. 32% feared AI rules wouldn’t go far enough, and only 14% said they feared overregulation. This is a mandate for policymakers to stop underestimating what voters will support, and start holding those who use and abuse automated systems accountable. TechTonic Justice works alongside poor and working-class communities to expose harmful uses of AI, challenge the institutions behind them, and build community power over the decisions that shape our lives. Follow us to be the first to get our policy briefing.

🤝 Meet the team working to create a world rooted in justice for the people AI is leaving behind. TechTonic Justice is a group of multidisciplinary, multidimensional, and multi-talented people who care deeply about human rights in the world of AI. We have fought back – and won – against harmful uses of AI tools against low-income people. To introduce the crew, we asked each person a simple question: “If you could ban one use of AI tomorrow, what would it be?” Rachel Fagen, Director of Operations "One use of AI I'd ban tomorrow: employee monitoring and use in determining employee evaluations." Ryan D. Davis, Arkansas Organizing Director "I’d immediately ban the use of AI in any form of decision making. The community has to have a say ultimately in any of the ways (and IF) governments use AI. " Maya Hazarika Watts, Senior Attorney "One use I'd ban: AI to make eligibility determinations for public services or benefits." Ralph M, Technologist "I'd ban the use of AI in interpreting laws and policy to suggest or make decisions that impact lives." John Yi, California Organizing Director "I'd treat the internet like tobacco: highly regulated, seen as a health hazard, and only implemented in very specific circumstances." Andrea Reyes, National Organizing Director "I'd ban using AI to determine a person's eligibility for public services or constrain their ability to pursue a self-determined and dignified future." Clarence Okoh, National Director of Civil Rights and Technology "I'd immediately ban AI surveillance in schools." Susan Garcia Nofi, Legal Director "I would ban the use of AI to make or recommend decisions to deny any public benefit or service or healthcare." Heather D., Chief of Staff "I think AI should be banned from schools. My generation wasn't allowed to use graphing calculators in math class. If districts were able to ban the use of a calculator, they can ban AI." Kevin De Liban, Founder & President "I'd ban AI from cutting any economic opportunity, whether that's benefits, wages, access to housing, education, or otherwise." These aren’t pipe dreams. We’re actively working to make them a reality, bringing together impacted communities and policymakers to enact real-world change when it comes to AI. Follow along for more research, recommendations, case studies, and technical guidelines.

Meet John Yi, our new California State Organizing Director.  John Yi has been working to build out the state strategy and political home for Californians who are hurt when powerful people use AI to make decisions about how we live, learn, work, and survive. Before joining the team, he worked on several major campaigns, including Tom Steyer for Governor of California, Prop 56, and running for California State Assembly. He's worked as a community organizer fighting against Big Tobacco, for LA's pedestrians, and for more affordable housing. He speaks Korean, Russian, and Spanish and lives with his husband David and their dog Wilshire in LA's Koreatown. John’s passion lies in believing that public transit and public spaces will save America. We’re so happy to have John on staff leading our on-the-ground organizing in California. 🔥 And, we are grateful to all of you who are helping us grow and reach these new milestones. Stay plugged in with us  so you can meet the faces behind the fight!   

AI is moving deeper into the public systems people rely on every day. From Medicaid and SNAP to 911 response and family policing, automated systems are increasingly shaping high-stakes decisions. Different systems. Same stakes. TechTonic Justice is naming the risks, the accountability gaps, and what’s at stake for the people these systems are supposed to serve. Learn how AI is impacting our daily systems across the country with these news stories featuring quotes from us: 📖https://lnkd.in/gysyu4YN 📖https://lnkd.in/g_U-U6WR  📖 https://lnkd.in/gRHm4fZH #AIinjustice #automatedsystems

An algorithm cut some disabled Arkansans’ home care by 20- 40%. Arkansans fought back through the courts, organizing, public education, and the press– and won. Automated injustice isn’t inevitable. Arkansas’s fight underpins TechTonic Justice’s work. Today, Arkansas remains a focus of our efforts to fight AI injustice. Read more about the Arkansas fight (LinkedIn): https://lnkd.in/e6ChkWP4 Check out the full interview with Free Speech TV https://lnkd.in/egkBFPnq #RisingUpForJustice #RU4Justice #RUWithSonali

AI shows up in decisions about our housing, healthcare, education, employment, benefits, and more– but why? To fight injustice, we must ask who gains power from using AI in decisions about our most critical needs. Check out the conversation our Founder and President, Kevin De Liban, had with Free Speech TV. To explore our resources on AI usage, visit https://lnkd.in/eZfSUreV. https://lnkd.in/egkBFPnq #RisingUpForJustice #RU4Justice #RUWithSonali