President Donald Trump announced on Monday his intention to sign an executive order aimed at preventing states from implementing their own regulations on artificial intelligence (AI) technology. This move comes amid mounting bipartisan resistance to such federal intervention.
In a social media post, Trump stated, “I will be doing a ONE RULE Executive Order this week. You can’t expect a company to get 50 approvals every time they want to do something.” He emphasized the need for uniform regulations, asserting that a fragmented approach among states could jeopardize the United States’ competitive edge in AI innovation.
This announcement follows a Senate effort that aimed to restrict state-level AI regulations, which was recently derailed when Congress failed to include the controversial provision in a critical defense budget bill. In response to the fast-paced development of AI technology, many states, including California and Tennessee, have begun to establish their own rules. California’s SB 53 focuses on AI safety and transparency, while Tennessee’s ELVIS Act defends performers against unauthorized AI-generated deepfakes.
Silicon Valley leaders, including OpenAI President Greg Brockman and White House ‘AI czar’ David Sacks, have voiced concerns that state regulations could create a confusing and counterproductive legal landscape, undermining U.S. dominance in AI development relative to countries like China. Conversely, proponents of state regulations argue that claims of detrimental effects on AI progress are exaggerated.
Trump’s forthcoming executive order, details of which were leaked earlier, aims to form an “AI Litigation Task Force” to challenge state laws in court and encourage federal agencies to scrutinize regulations perceived as burdensome. It would also prompt the Federal Communications Commission and the Federal Trade Commission to establish nationwide standards, effectively superseding state laws.
Critics, including New York Assembly member Alex Bores, contend that the order favors corporate interests at the expense of public welfare, raising concerns about safety and job security. Past attempts to curb state regulation of AI have faced significant backlash from both political parties.
For example, Sen. Ted Cruz’s proposal for a ten-year moratorium on AI legislation was overwhelmingly rejected, signaling a shared reluctance among lawmakers to allow tech companies to operate without oversight. Even some Republicans, including Gov. Ron DeSantis and Sen. Marco Rubio, have publicly opposed the idea of federal preemption, advocating for state autonomy in regulating AI in the interests of their constituents.
The contentious debate on AI regulation not only reflects concerns over technological impacts on safety but also addresses broader issues of governance and federalism. A coalition of more than 35 state attorneys general recently warned that undermining state laws could lead to severe consequences, while over 200 lawmakers signed a letter opposing federal preemption.
This developing situation underscores the urgent need for a coherent and effective approach to AI regulation that balances innovation with consumer protections.
