White House Plans Executive Order to Rein in State AI Rules

After Congress failed to include a moratorium on domestic artificial intelligence laws in the annual defense policy bill, the White House appears to be taking matters into its own hands.

President Donald Trump posted on his Truth Social account Monday that he will sign an executive order this week to address various state AI laws and processes.

Trump’s job did not specify whether the order would attempt to preempt state AI laws or whether it would establish a national standard on issues such as training data, discrimination or security. The White House did not provide additional information on the upcoming order.

Trump said having a national AI policy rather than different national laws would support U.S. dominance in the AI industry. He called some states that legislate around AI “bad actors” and said state laws could destroy AI “in its infancy.”

“I’m going to write a ONE RULE executive order this week,” he said. “You can’t expect a company to get 50 approvals every time they want to do something. IT WILL NEVER WORK!”

The tech industry applauded the announcement, having long supported abandoning state laws governing AI.

Amy Bos, vice president of government affairs at technology industry group NetChoice, said a “patchwork” of state regulations would create a “compliance nightmare” for AI companies.

“This executive order is an important step in ensuring that smart, unified federal policy – not bureaucratic red tape – ensures America’s AI dominance for generations to come,” she said.

Americans for Responsible Innovation leader Brad Carson, a former Democratic House member from Oklahoma, in a statement called AI preemption “politically toxic,” which he said has prevented the effort from advancing in Congress. His group, supported by philanthropic organizations, has advocated for safeguards around AI.

“Voters, parents and lawmakers across the country do not want a rule-free zone for AI companies. An EO that bypasses Congress on this issue will face serious challenges in court and expose the administration to public backlash,” he said.

Previous version

A draft decree on national AI laws was leaked for the first time and published by the media in November.

The bill would not ban state AI laws, but rather would establish a task force within the Justice Department to challenge state laws, “including on the grounds that such laws unconstitutionally regulate interstate commerce, are preempted by existing federal regulations, or are otherwise unlawful.”

The draft would also require the federal government to develop a list of specific AI laws that make their states ineligible for funding or that the task force should challenge, including those that “require AI models to modify their truthful results” or mandate certain disclosures from AI developers or deployers.

The draft decree would not establish a national standard on AI.

However, it would direct the Federal Communications Commission, in coordination with David O. Sacks, Special Advisor to the President on AI and Cryptography, to begin proceedings to decide whether to adopt a reporting and disclosure standard for AI.

It would also direct the Federal Trade Commission, also in coordination with Sacks, to issue a policy statement explaining when the FTC’s ban on deceptive acts or practices affecting commerce preempts state AI laws that “require changes to the truthful results of AI models.”

Finally, it would direct Sacks and the Office of Legislative Affairs to prepare a legislative recommendation establishing a national framework for AI.

The order would also direct the Department of Commerce to restrict states’ access to non-deployment funding, for community access and other uses, under the $42.5 billion Rural Broadband Internet Equity, Access and Deployment program, known as BEAD, based on their AI laws.

Debates in Congress

During negotiations on the compromise NDAA, released Sunday, the White House pushed for the inclusion of a pause in state AI laws.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise supported the initiative, and a moratorium has been a priority for Senate Commerce Chairman Ted Cruz for much of the year.

Democrats, including Senators Edward J. Markey and Elizabeth Warren, spoke out against a moratorium in a “Dear Colleague” letter. They said this would “prevent states from responding to the urgent risks posed by the rapid deployment of AI”.

Cruz supported including a moratorium in the budget reconciliation bill this summer, but that provision was ultimately removed in a 99-1 Senate vote.

The removal campaign was led, in part, by Sen. Marsha Blackburn, who was keen to protect the state’s music industry. Tennessee passed legislation to give individuals ownership over their voice, including when it is generated by AI without permission.

The idea of a moratorium did not gain traction among Republican ranks in the months that followed.

In October, Sen. Josh Hawley called it “crazy” to preempt states that have legislated to protect children from online exploitation or deepfake pornography.

“I want to protect children from all of these things, and I want states to be able to do that. You know? I mean, I think it’s a really bad idea to say, ‘Oh no, states, you can’t protect your children in your own state,'” Hawley said.

During negotiations over the NDAA, Senator Mike Rounds expressed his preference for leaving state laws in place, at least until a national standard is in place on AI.

“States do a very good job of taking care of their local concerns. And in many cases, or at least in some cases, we should be able to take some of the ideas that they’re proposing and maybe incorporate them into a national policy,” he said.

Around this time, Rounds also questioned the White House’s power to override state laws.

“I’m not sure what they can do other than strongly recommend to Congress that we actually get to work and develop national policies on some of the same issues that states are concerned about,” he said.