President Donald Trump is considering signing an executive order as early as Friday that would give the federal government unilateral authority to regulate artificial intelligence, including the creation of an “AI Litigation Task Force” overseen by the attorney general “whose sole responsibility will be to challenge state AI laws.”
In accordance with the draft ordinance obtained by Edge, the task force could sue states whose laws are seen as hindering the growth of the AI industry, citing California’s recent AI safety and “catastrophic risk” laws and Colorado’s law that prevents “algorithmic discrimination.” The task force will occasionally consult with a group of White House special advisers, including David Sacks, a billionaire venture capitalist and special adviser on artificial intelligence and cryptocurrencies.
In recent days, Trump has repeatedly expressed his desire to impose a state moratorium on the apply of artificial intelligence, and he repeated that on Wednesday during his speech at the US-Saudi Investment Forumpresenting it as a way to combat the ideology of “wokeness”. “You can’t drive through 50 states. You have to get one permit. Fifty is a disaster. Because you will have one awakening state and you will have to awaken in all of them. You will go back to the awakening business. We are no longer awake in this country. It is practically illegal. You will have several awakenings.”
As part of the AI roadmap published earlier this yearTrump has directed several federal agencies, including the FCC, to explore ways to bypass “burdensome” state and local regulations to promote growth and innovation in the industry. The full executive order sets out a 90-day action plan for several key agencies to implement this plan along with the Department of Justice: the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Commerce, and the Federal Communications Commission.
Within 90 days of signing the order, the Secretary of Commerce will be directed to release a report identifying which states are violating Trump’s AI policy guidelines, as well as examining which states may be ineligible for the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) program, which funds rural broadband access in several states. Meanwhile, the FTC will be asked to issue a statement on whether states requiring artificial intelligence companies to change their algorithms would violate laws prohibiting unfair and duplicitous practices.
While arrival at PolicyAI & Tech Summit in SeptemberFCC Commissioner Brendan Carr offered one potential interpretation of the Communications Act that would allow them to circumvent state law. “In practice, if state or local law effectively prohibits the deployment of this ‘modern infrastructure,’ then the FCC has the authority to step in,” he said. PolicyAlex Burns.
Carr also raised the possibility that the FCC’s regulatory powers could invalidate a potential novel law in California that would require artificial intelligence companies to disclose their security testing models, arguing that it would fulfill Trump’s goal of blocking “woke AI” that contained ideological bias.
He cited the EU’s Digital Security Act and expressed his concern: “their AI models will not be truth-seeking AI models, but will become waking AI models, that is, AI models that promote DEI. And again, President Trump as part of his action plan has taken steps to make sure that we do not have evolving AI models here with woke DEI. Again, as for California, not entirely familiar with the full intricacies of this issue, but to the extent that they are heading in that direction and stray from the search for truth, that could be a problem.”
The notion that the FCC should have veto power over state AI regulations — as well as other parts of Trump’s executive order — could easily be challenged in court. However, efforts like the Litigation Task Force could continue to make it more difficult for states to regulate AI.
Punchbowl News announced on Wednesday that the executive order is the White House’s contingency plan in the event that Congress fails to pass a state moratorium on the artificial intelligence law, this time through the upcoming reauthorization of the National Defense Authorization Act – a law that absolutely must be passed in order for the government to fund its national security apparatus.
Earlier this year, Congress tried to squeeze a moratorium into Trump’s “Massive Attractive Act,” which outlined spending for his second-term program, but failed after a bipartisan group of senators expressed opposition to the bill. Earlier this week, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise he said Punchbowl News that Congress was considering a second attempt at a moratorium by attaching it to the NDAA.
But as with the fight against the Big Beautiful Bill, a moratorium hidden in a section of the NDAA could face opposition, especially if the penalty is the same: withholding funding for rural broadband. “The real question is: How much subsidy is needed to pressure state lawmakers to change their AI laws?” Thierer said. “This came up during the previous moratorium fight, and some feared that California would simply ignore the budget threats associated with BEAD, for example. It may take multiple appeals or budget restrictions to really put pressure on a state as enormous as California.”