Trump’s ‘ONE RULE’ Executive Order Aims to Override State AI Regulations Amid Bipartisan Opposition
In a bold move to centralize artificial intelligence (AI) governance, President Donald Trump announced plans to sign an executive order titled ONE RULE within the week. This directive seeks to prevent individual states from implementing their own AI regulations, a decision that has sparked significant bipartisan debate.
President Trump articulated his stance on social media, stating, I will be doing a ONE RULE Executive Order this week. You can’t expect a company to get 50 Approvals every time they want to do something. He emphasized the necessity of a unified regulatory framework to maintain the United States’ leadership in AI development, warning that disparate state regulations could hinder progress and allow other nations to surpass the U.S. in this critical technological race.
This announcement follows a recent Senate decision to reject a proposal that would have preempted state-level AI regulations. The proposal faced substantial opposition and was ultimately excluded from a must-pass defense budget bill.
The rapid advancement of AI technologies, coupled with a lack of comprehensive federal consumer protections, has led several states to enact their own AI-related laws. For instance, California introduced SB 53, focusing on AI safety and transparency, while Tennessee’s ELVIS Act safeguards musicians and performers from unauthorized AI-generated deepfakes of their voices and likenesses.
Prominent figures in Silicon Valley, including OpenAI President Greg Brockman and venture capitalist turned White House AI czar David Sacks, have expressed concerns that a patchwork of state regulations could stifle innovation and compromise the U.S.’s competitive edge against countries like China in AI development. They argue that a unified federal approach is essential to foster innovation and maintain global leadership.
However, advocates for states’ rights contend that state-level AI laws are crucial for addressing specific local concerns and protecting consumers. They challenge the notion that such regulations would impede AI progress, emphasizing the importance of tailored policies that reflect the unique needs and values of individual states.
The draft of the executive order, which was leaked recently, outlines the establishment of an AI Litigation Task Force tasked with challenging state AI laws in court. It also directs federal agencies to assess state laws deemed onerous and encourages the Federal Communications Commission and Federal Trade Commission to develop national standards that would override state regulations.
This move has drawn criticism from various quarters. New York Assembly member Alex Bores, sponsor of New York’s RAISE Act, described the executive order as a massive handout to AI billionaires, expressing concerns about the potential risks to children, public safety, and employment.
The initiative to limit state authority over AI regulation has faced resistance from both Republican and Democratic lawmakers. Earlier this year, Senator Ted Cruz (R-TX) proposed a 10-year moratorium on state AI legislation, which was overwhelmingly rejected in a rare display of bipartisan agreement.
Several Republican politicians have also voiced their opposition to the executive order. Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) emphasized the importance of preserving federalism and states’ rights to regulate AI. Similarly, Governor Ron DeSantis (R-FL) expressed concerns about the potential overreach of federal authority and the need for states to enact protections for individuals and families.
The potential harms of unregulated AI technology are not merely theoretical. Incidents involving AI chatbots have been linked to mental health crises, including suicides, and psychologists have identified a condition termed AI psychosis. These developments underscore the urgency of establishing effective regulatory frameworks to mitigate risks associated with AI.
A bipartisan coalition of over 35 state attorneys general recently cautioned Congress that overriding state AI laws could have disastrous consequences. Additionally, more than 200 state lawmakers have issued an open letter opposing federal preemption, highlighting potential setbacks to progress on AI safety.
As the debate over AI regulation continues, the forthcoming executive order is poised to intensify discussions about the balance between federal authority and states’ rights, the pace of technological innovation, and the imperative to protect public interests in the rapidly evolving AI landscape.
