President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Dec. 11, 2025 that seeks to supersede state‑level artificial‑intelligence (AI) laws the administration says block innovation.
Background: State AI Regulations
In 2025, thirty‑eight states enacted some form of AI regulation, ranging from prohibitions on AI‑powered robot stalking to bans on systems designed to manipulate behavior.
Key Provisions of the Executive Order
The order declares a national policy of a “minimally burdensome” AI framework. It directs the U.S. attorney general to create an AI litigation task force to challenge state laws that conflict with that policy. The secretary of commerce must identify “onerous” state AI statutes and withhold funding from the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) program for states that retain those laws, while exempting any state AI measures that protect child safety.
Industry and State Perspectives
Big‑tech firms have lobbied for federal preemption, arguing that compliance with a patchwork of state rules hampers innovation. State lawmakers, in turn, frame their measures as a balance between public safety and economic benefit.
Examples of State Laws That May Be Targeted
Algorithmic discrimination
Colorado’s Consumer Protections for Artificial Intelligence law, the first comprehensive state AI statute, regulates predictive AI used in employment, housing, credit, education and health‑care decisions. It obliges “high‑risk” users to conduct impact assessments, notify consumers when predictive AI informs consequential decisions, and disclose system details and risk‑management plans. Enforcement has been delayed while the legislature reviews the law’s implications.
Illinois will, on Jan. 1, 2026, amend its Human Rights Act to make AI‑driven discrimination a civil‑rights violation for employers.
Frontier AI models
California’s Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act imposes guardrails on the world’s largest foundation models—those costing at least $100 million and requiring at least 1026 floating‑point operations to train. The law requires developers to explain how they follow national and international standards, summarize catastrophic‑risk assessments, and report critical safety incidents to the state’s Office of Emergency Services.
Disclosures and liability
Texas’ Responsible AI Governance Act restricts AI development for behavioral manipulation, offers “safe‑harbor” protections for entities that document compliance with the NIST AI Risk Management Framework, and creates a sandbox for isolated testing of AI behavior.
Utah’s Artificial Intelligence Policy Act mandates that companies using generative AI disclose the interaction to consumers, placing ultimate liability for harms on the organization rather than the technology.
Political Pushback
Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis opposes federal attempts to override state AI rules and has proposed a Florida AI Bill of Rights to address “obvious dangers.” Attorneys general from 38 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, American Samoa and the U.S. Virgin Islands have urged AI firms—including Anthropic, Apple, Google, Meta, Microsoft, OpenAI, Perplexity AI and xAI—to correct sycophantic or delusional outputs that can mislead users.
Frequently Asked Questions
What does the executive order aim to achieve?
It seeks a national AI framework that is “minimally burdensome,” directs the attorney general to form a litigation task force against conflicting state laws, and orders the secretary of commerce to withhold BEAD funding from states with “onerous” AI statutes, except for those protecting child safety.
How many states enacted AI regulations in 2025?
Thirty‑eight states passed laws that regulate AI in various ways, from banning AI‑stalking robots to restricting AI systems that manipulate behavior.
Why might the executive order be considered illegal?
Observers argue that only Congress has the authority to supersede state laws, suggesting the order could be deemed unlawful unless Congress passes legislation granting such power.
How do you think this federal push will shape the balance between innovation and consumer protection in the AI arena?
Worth a look