Trump To Sign Order Blocking State AI Regulations

Donald Trump has said he will sign an executive order this week to create a single national framework for regulating artificial intelligence that is intended to override or undermine many state-level AI rules. The order has not yet been formally issued, but drafts and White House statements describe an aggressive federal preemption strategy that will likely face significant legal challenges.​

What Trump is proposing

Trump has publicly pledged a “ONE RULE” executive order that would prevent companies from having to comply with different AI regulations in all 50 states, instead placing them under a unified federal standard. Industry groups and some tech leaders have argued that a patchwork of state laws creates compliance burdens and could weaken U.S. competitiveness in AI.​

Drafts of the order, reported by multiple outlets, indicate it is geared toward a relatively light-touch, pro-innovation federal framework that limits what states can require around AI safety, transparency, or content rules. The administration frames this as necessary to “sustain and enhance” U.S. dominance in AI and to avoid what it sees as overregulation by states such as California and Colorado.​

How it would try to block state AI laws

Leaked drafts describe several mechanisms the executive order would use to push back on state AI regulations. Key tools include:​

• Creating an AI Litigation Task Force in the Justice Department to challenge state AI laws in court as unconstitutional, burdensome to interstate commerce, or in conflict with federal policy.​

• Directing the Commerce Department and other agencies to identify “onerous” or conflicting state AI laws and publish reports that can be used in litigation and policy guidance.​

• Considering restrictions on certain federal funds, including broadband and other discretionary grants, for states that enact or enforce targeted AI rules.​

• Pushing agencies like the FCC and FTC to adopt national AI standards or policy statements that would preempt conflicting state requirements on disclosures, safety practices, or changes to “truthful” AI model outputs.​

What kinds of state laws are at risk

Reporting suggests the order is especially aimed at broad, cross‑sector AI laws and some high‑profile state measures. Examples frequently cited as potential targets include:​

• Comprehensive state AI frameworks that impose risk assessments, transparency rules, or registration requirements on a wide range of AI systems, like those passed or proposed in California and Colorado.​

• State rules that require AI models to alter or suppress “truthful” outputs, or that mandate detailed disclosures that federal officials argue could conflict with constitutional protections or federal consumer‑protection doctrine.​

• Certain sector-specific laws, such as state deepfake or voice‑cloning protections, could be implicated depending on how broadly agencies interpret the new federal policy, though drafts suggest the focus is on laws seen as especially restrictive for AI developers.​

Legal and political pushback

Legal experts note that an executive order cannot simply erase state laws by itself and that many of the preemption arguments will have to be tested in court. Congress, rather than the president, usually plays the central role in creating explicit nationwide preemption, which is why the failure of earlier legislative attempts to impose a 10‑year moratorium on state AI regulation is significant.​

State officials from both parties, civil rights advocates, and AI safety researchers have warned that weakening state authority could slow progress on guardrails for issues like discrimination, consumer harms, and election misinformation. Supporters of the order, including many AI companies, counter that a single, relatively permissive federal standard will accelerate innovation and keep the U.S. ahead of rivals such as China.​

Federal vs. state approach at a glance