The Trump administration signed an executive order directing federal agencies to challenge state laws that regulate artificial intelligence, creating immediate legal uncertainty and drawing criticism from across the political spectrum.
Key directives in the order include forming an “AI Litigation Task Force” within the Justice Department to sue states over AI-related laws, and instructing the Federal Trade Commission and Federal Communications Commission to work with the DOJ to implement the White House’s AI action plan aimed at circumventing what the order calls “onerous” state and local regulations. The order also directs Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to study whether federal rural broadband funding can be withheld from states with AI laws the administration finds unfavorable.
President Trump framed the move in competitive terms: “We have to be unified. China is unified because they have one vote, that’s President Xi. He says do it, and that’s the end of that.” David Sacks, the administration’s AI advisor, said the administration will be selective in its challenges: “Kid safety, we’re going to protect. We’re not pushing back on that, but we’re going to push back on the most onerous examples of state regulations.” The order also asks Sacks to work with Congress on crafting national AI legislation.
Legal experts and tech policy researchers say the order is almost certain to face court challenges and argue the administration lacks authority to preempt state regulation without congressional action. John Bergmayer, legal director at Public Knowledge, said the administration appears to be trying to “bypass Congress” and that the theories in the order are unlikely to hold up. He noted that states can and do regulate interstate commerce, pointing to a 2023 Supreme Court decision that upheld California’s authority to regulate its pork industry even where the rules affected out-of-state producers.
Criticism came from both sides of the aisle. Conservative child-safety advocates said the administration missed an opportunity for a consultative approach. Michael Toscano of the Family First Technology Initiative called the order “a huge lost opportunity” for involving stakeholders in a populist movement. Adam Billen of Encode warned that even if the order is overturned, it will chill states’ willingness to protect residents, creating “massive legal uncertainty and gray areas” that benefit companies.
Many states have already enacted AI-related laws while Congress has stalled on national regulation. State measures include banning AI-generated nonconsensual nude images, requiring government agencies and businesses to disclose AI usage, mandating checks for algorithmic discrimination, and protecting whistleblowers. The administration has pushed for lighter regulation to maintain competitiveness with China, even as it recently approved sales of advanced Nvidia chips to China—a move some analysts say could dilute the U.S.’s edge in AI.
Efforts to block state-level AI regulation have surfaced repeatedly this year. Republicans tried and failed to insert an AI preemption into the annual defense spending bill, and a prior proposed moratorium was dropped from a reconciliation bill. The executive order, or an earlier leaked version, drew opposition from some Republicans, including governors. Utah Gov. Spencer Cox preferred an alternate order that preserved states’ ability to protect children and families. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis posted that “An executive order doesn’t/can’t preempt state legislative action,” adding that only Congress could theoretically preempt states through legislation.
Sen. Ted Cruz, who introduced an AI moratorium during reconciliation debates, stood with Trump at the signing ceremony. Other Republicans, including Sen. Josh Hawley, criticized the provision; Hawley posted that it “is a terrible provision and should remain OUT.” Many Republican governors also voiced opposition.
The executive order makes clear the administration intends to press for a national framework for AI while using executive tools to challenge state laws in the interim. Legal challenges appear likely, and experts say resolving whether the federal government can lawfully override state AI regulation will ultimately fall to the courts and Congress.
NPR’s Bobby Allyn contributed reporting.