In a significant move regarding the future of artificial intelligence (AI) regulation, President Donald Trump announced plans on Monday to sign an executive order aimed at establishing a uniform federal policy that would supersede state-level regulations. This decision has raised alarm among academics, safety advocates, and lawmakers across the political spectrum.
In a post on Truth Social, Trump emphasized the necessity for a single regulatory framework, stating, “There must be only One Rulebook if we are going to continue to lead in AI.” He expressed concerns that the involvement of multiple states in crafting regulations could hinder innovation and threaten the U.S.’s competitive edge in the global AI landscape. “We are beating ALL COUNTRIES at this point in the race,” he added, cautioning that this advantage could diminish if states impose their own rules and approval processes.
His remarks align with worries expressed by experts concerned that this deregulatory approach may allow AI companies to downplay accountability, particularly in instances where their technologies could harm consumers. With limited oversight currently governing AI—which is rapidly permeating various aspects of life, including communication, healthcare, and law enforcement—some states have begun to implement their own protective measures. These have included laws targeting deceptive deepfakes and algorithmic biases in hiring practices.
Tech industry leaders, including OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, have previously argued that a multitude of state regulations could stifle innovation and jeopardize America’s position in the competitive AI arena. The draft of Trump’s executive order, which has recently circulated, supports this view by purporting to “enhance America’s global AI dominance through a minimally burdensome, uniform national policy framework for AI.” It outlines the establishment of an AI Litigation Task Force aimed at challenging state regulations, thereby reinforcing a more lenient federal stance.
Trump’s assertion that companies should not be subjected to the burdens of obtaining multiple state approvals was reiterated in his posts, suggesting that a fragmented regulatory landscape could “DESTROY AI IN ITS INFANCY!”
Amid these developments, National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett commented that Trump had examined “something close to a final” version of the order over the weekend. He indicated that the forthcoming executive action would clarify a unified set of rules for AI enterprises in the United States.
Previous attempts by Congress to restrict state-level regulation of AI encountered robust resistance. In July, the U.S. Senate almost unanimously opted to strip a 10-year moratorium on state AI regulations from Trump’s broader domestic policy bill. Following this, the Trump administration had issued a tech-friendly action plan aimed at reducing AI regulations to bolster U.S. competitiveness.
The prospect of eliminating state oversight has faced significant backlash in light of growing concerns regarding the potential dangers of AI technology. Recent reports have highlighted the risks of AI contributing to mental health issues and exposing vulnerable populations, especially children, to harmful content. Florida Governor Ron DeSantis referred to the initiative as “federal government overreach,” arguing that it undermines state authority to manage such risks. He claimed that this move would effectively serve as a subsidy to big tech companies, limiting states’ ability to safeguard against online censorship, abusive applications targeting children, and breaches of intellectual property rights.
In addition, a coalition of hundreds of organizations—including labor groups, tech safety nonprofits, and educational institutions—has rallied against the idea of hindering state regulation. They warn that allowing Big Tech to dictate AI governance could lead to severe societal consequences, including widespread job displacement and rising living costs due to exploitative algorithms.
Sacha Haworth, Executive Director of The Tech Oversight Project, encapsulated this concern in a recent statement, arguing, “We’re in a fight to determine who will benefit from AI: Big Tech CEOs or the American people.”
