The Trump administration is preparing to take decisive action that could reshape how artificial intelligence (AI) is regulated across the country. A draft executive order reviewed by Fox News Digital reveals plans to instruct the Justice Department to challenge states that implement their own AI regulations. This initiative is laid out in a six-page document titled, “Eliminating State Law Obstruction of National AI Policy,” indicating a clear intent to centralize authority in Washington over this rapidly evolving technology.
This draft is notably marked “Deliberative / Predecisional / Draft,” suggesting that it remains an internal working document subject to further revisions and not yet finalized. These markers mean its details may not be made public until a final version is officially announced, reflecting a stage of policy discussions still in play. This situation highlights a tension between state and federal authority on technology regulation that is set to unfold in the coming months.
Insider reports from the White House indicate that any discussions about executive orders are currently speculative. However, this proposed measure represents a significant step for the Trump administration. During his second term, President Trump has focused heavily on maintaining America’s leadership in both energy and AI, framing this initiative as crucial to national security and economic strength.
The draft order proposes the formation of an AI Litigation Task Force designed to challenge state laws that deviate from federal standards. This task force is expected to be established within 30 days of the executive order’s signing. Additionally, it calls for the Commerce Department to swiftly review state AI regulations and potentially withhold federal funds from states that do not comply with federal directives. This approach emphasizes the administration’s commitment to establishing a cohesive federal framework that limits state autonomy in technological governance.
The executive order not only targets regulations from states like California and Colorado but also leverages them as examples of how localized laws could hinder U.S. progress in the AI landscape. The draft states that such “fear-based” regulations obstruct the country’s ambitions, posing challenges to its supremacy in this crucial sector. This language indicates a strategic framing of regulatory issues, positioning state efforts as detrimental to national interests.
Moreover, in seeking to standardize AI oversight, the order would involve the Federal Trade Commission and the Federal Communications Commission in crafting nationwide transparency rules. This move is indicative of a broader strategy to preclude states from enforcing their own potentially stricter regulations on AI, reinforcing a top-down approach in federal governance.
Contextually, these developments come on the heels of earlier legislative attempts in Congress to curtail individual state authority over AI regulations. A previous initiative to block state-level AI regulation failed after facing resistance from Senate Republicans, who raised valid concerns regarding the need for oversight to protect consumers and workers. This failed attempt highlights the complexities surrounding these governance issues as a debate continues about the impact of AI on jobs and other societal factors.
The proposed executive order’s endorsement of federal oversight represents a notable shift away from a traditional Republican emphasis on state sovereignty. Recent actions taken by the Trump administration against states like California, New York, and Vermont further illustrate this aggressive stance. By pursuing litigation against these states over various laws, the administration has shown a willingness to assert federal priorities over local regulations.
As discussions continue and the draft order possibly evolves, the implications for state autonomy and federal control over AI will remain significant. This proposed executive order stands as one of the strongest efforts yet by the Trump administration to challenge state authority, potentially setting a precedent for future federal interventions in technological regulation. The outcome of this initiative could redefine the landscape of AI regulation and signal a major shift in how such issues will be addressed moving forward.
"*" indicates required fields
