Federal Push to Preempt State AI Laws Ignites Widespread Opposition

A renewed federal effort to block states from enacting their own artificial intelligence regulations is drawing significant criticism from state governments and lawmakers across the United States. This move, spearheaded by a draft White House Executive Order and discussions within Congress, aims to establish a uniform national AI policy but faces accusations of federal overreach and prioritizing industry interests over public safety. Mike Swift noted on social media, > "Seeing lots of govs and state lawmakers unhappy abou the second coming of the proposed state AI legislative moratorium."

This latest push follows a previous attempt in July, where a proposed amendment to a budget reconciliation bill that would have imposed a moratorium on state and local AI enforcement was overwhelmingly rejected by the Senate in a 99-1 vote. Despite that clear signal, the White House has prepared a draft Executive Order titled "Eliminating State Law Obstruction of National AI Policy," which directs federal agencies to challenge or preempt state AI regulations deemed inconsistent with federal policy. Congressional Republicans are also reportedly seeking to include an AI preemption provision in the Fiscal Year 2026 National Defense Authorization Act.

Proponents of federal preemption, including some in the tech industry, argue that a patchwork of state laws could stifle innovation and hinder America's global competitiveness in AI development. The draft Executive Order explicitly states its policy goal is "to sustain and enhance America’s global AI dominance through a minimally burdensome, uniform national policy framework for AI." This perspective suggests that a unified regulatory environment is essential for the rapid advancement of AI technologies.

However, state officials and tech safety advocates are voicing strong opposition, concerned that such federal intervention would undermine states' ability to protect their citizens from potential AI harms. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis called the effort "federal government overreach," asserting that "Stripping states of jurisdiction to regulate AI is a subsidy to Big Tech." Critics argue that blocking state regulations could shield Silicon Valley from accountability, especially as AI scams and safety concerns escalate.

States like Colorado, California, and Utah have already begun enacting their own AI legislation, addressing issues ranging from algorithmic discrimination to transparency in generative AI. These state-level initiatives are seen by many as crucial "laboratories of democracy," allowing for agile responses to evolving technology and tailored protections for local populations. The ongoing debate highlights a fundamental tension between fostering innovation through a unified framework and ensuring robust public safeguards through diverse state-led approaches.