President Donald Trump is considering signing an executive order as soon as Friday that would give the federal government unilateral power over regulating artificial intelligence. This includes the establishment of an “AI Litigation Task Force” overseen by the attorney general, “whose sole responsibility shall be to challenge State AI laws.” According to a draft of the order obtained by The Verge, the Task Force would be authorized to sue states whose laws are seen as hindering the growth of the AI industry. This could target California’s recent AI safety laws and a Colorado law that aims to prevent “algorithmic discrimination.” The task force will periodically consult with a group of White House special advisers, including David Sacks, a billionaire venture capitalist and special adviser for AI and crypto.
Recently, Trump has expressed his desire for a moratorium on state AI laws, reiterating this on Wednesday during his appearance at the US-Saudi Investment Forum. He framed it as a way to combat “woke” ideology. “You can’t go through 50 states. You have to get one approval. Fifty is a disaster. Because you’ll have one woke state and you’ll have to do all woke. You’ll be back in the woke business. We don’t have woke anymore in this country. It’s virtually illegal,” he stated. “You’ll have a couple of wokesters.”
As part of the AI Action Plan released earlier this year, Trump directed several federal agencies, including the FCC, to explore ways to bypass “onerous” state and local regulations to foster growth and innovation in the industry. The full executive order outlines a 90-day roadmap for key agencies, including the Department of Justice, the Federal Trade Commission, and the Department of Commerce, to implement this plan.
Within 90 days of the order’s signing, the secretary of commerce will be instructed to publish a report identifying which states violate Trump’s AI policy directives and research potential disqualifications from the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) program, which supports rural broadband access in several states. The FTC will also be tasked with assessing whether state requirements for AI companies to modify their algorithms could violate laws against unfair and deceptive practices.
During an appearance at Politico’s AI & Tech Summit in September, FCC Commissioner Brendan Carr mentioned a possible interpretation of the Communications Act that would permit them to override state law. “Effectively, if a state or local law is prohibiting the deployment of this ‘modern infrastructure,’ then the FCC has authorities to step in there,” he told Politico’s Alex Burns. Carr suggested that the FCC’s regulatory authority could override a potential new California law requiring AI companies to disclose their safety testing models, aligning with Trump’s objectives to eliminate what he calls “woke AI” that holds ideological biases.
He referenced the European Union’s Digital Safety Act, expressing concern that “their AI models are not going to be truth-seeking AI models, but they’re going to be woke AI models, promoting DEI.” He reiterated that President Trump has outlined steps in his action plan to ensure that such “woke DEI embedded AI models” don’t develop in the U.S. Carr mentioned that as California moves away from truth-seeking models, it could pose a problem.
The proposal for the FCC to have veto power over state AI laws—and other aspects of Trump’s order—could face legal challenges. However, initiatives like the litigation task force may create obstacles for states looking to regulate AI.
Punchbowl News reported on Wednesday that the executive order is a backup plan for the White House should Congress not pass a state AI law moratorium through the upcoming reauthorization of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA), a crucial bill for government funding of national security.
Earlier this year, Congress tried to add a moratorium to a draft of Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” that outlined spending for his second-term agenda, but the effort failed when a bipartisan group of senators opposed it. Recently, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise informed Punchbowl News that Congress is considering another attempt at a moratorium by attaching it to the NDAA.
Similar to the previous Big Beautiful Bill debate, a moratorium embedded in the NDAA’s passage might face opposition, especially if the consequences include withholding rural broadband funding. “The real question is, how large of a grant does it take to pressure state lawmakers to change their AI regulations?” asked Thierer. “This issue surfaced in the previous moratorium discussions, and some were concerned that California might ignore BEAD-related budget threats. It could take multiple budget cuts or limitations to apply real pressure on a state as significant as California.”
Follow topics and authors from this story to see more like this on your personalized homepage feed and to receive email updates.
Tina Nguyen
Close
Senior Reporter, Washington
Posts from this author will be added to your daily email digest and homepage feed.
Follow
See All by Tina Nguyen
AIClose
Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and homepage feed.
Follow
See All AI
PolicyClose
Posts from this topic will be added to your daily email digest and homepage feed.
Follow
See All Policy
