Here’s Trump’s executive order banning state AI laws

President Donald Trump is considering signing an executive order on Friday that would give the federal government unilateral authority to regulate artificial intelligence, including creating an “AI Litigation Task Force” overseen by the attorney general, “whose sole responsibility would be to challenge state AI laws.”

According to the draft order He got it Edge, The task force will be able to sue states whose laws are seen as hindering the growth of the AI ​​industry, citing California’s recent laws on AI safety and “catastrophic risk,” and Colorado’s law preventing “algorithmic discrimination.” The task force will occasionally consult with a group of White House special advisers, including David Sachs, the billionaire venture capitalist and special adviser on artificial intelligence and cryptocurrencies.

In recent days, Trump has repeatedly announced his desire to impose a ban on AI law in the state, and he reiterated that on Wednesday During his appearance at the US-Saudi Investment Forumand formulated as a means of combating “woke” ideology. “You can’t go through 50 states. You have to get one approval. 50 is a disaster. Because you’ll have one wake and you’ll have to do all the wakes. You’ll be back in the wake business. We don’t have wakes anymore in this country. It’s almost illegal. You’ll have a couple of wakes.”

As part of the AI ​​Action Plan released earlier this yearTrump has directed several federal agencies, including the Federal Communications Commission, to explore ways they can circumvent “onerous” state and local regulations in order to promote industry growth and innovation. The full executive order lays out a 90-day roadmap for several key agencies to implement that 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 Commerce Secretary will be directed to publish a report identifying states that are violating Trump’s AI policy directives, as well as finding states that may become ineligible for the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) program, which funds rural broadband access for several states. Meanwhile, the FTC will be directed to issue a statement on whether states requiring AI companies to change their algorithms violate laws prohibiting unfair and deceptive practices.

during Appearing at Politico’s AI & Technology Summit in SeptemberFCC Commissioner Brendan Carr floated one possible interpretation of the communications law that would allow them to override state law. “Effectively, if state or local law effectively prohibits the deployment of this ‘modern infrastructure,’ the FCC has powers to intervene there,” he told Politico reporter Alex Burns.

Carr also raised the possibility that the FCC’s regulatory powers would override a potential new law in California that would have required AI companies to disclose their safety testing models, saying it would achieve Trump’s goal of preventing “woke AI” that contains ideological biases.

He pointed out EU digital safety law “Their AI models are not going to be truth-seeking AI models, but they’re going to be woke AI models, they’re going to be DEI-promoting AI models. And again, President Trump, as part of his action plan, has steps to make sure that we don’t have the kind of built-in AI models that are being developed here. When it comes to California, again, I’m not familiar with all the complexities of that, but to the extent that they’re moving in that direction and away from searching for the truth, it could be a problem,” he raised concerns.

The idea that the FCC should have veto power over state AI laws — as well as other parts of Trump’s order — could easily be challenged in court. But moves like the Litigation Task Force can still create barriers to states regulating AI.

Punchbowl News reported on Wednesday The executive order is a backup plan for the White House in case Congress fails to pass a state-level moratorium on AI law, this time through the upcoming reauthorization of the National Defense Authorization Act — a bill that must surely pass so the government can fund its own national security apparatus.

Earlier this year, Congress tried to impose a ban on Trump’s “big, beautiful” bill that capped spending on his second-term agenda, but failed after a bipartisan group of senators expressed opposition to the bill. Earlier this week, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise said He told Punchbowl News That Congress was considering a second round in the moratorium by tying it to the National Defense Authorization Act.

But just as in the big, beautiful bill fight, a freeze buried within the National Defense Authorization Act passage would face particular opposition if the penalty were the same: withholding rural broadband funding. “The real question is, how much grant is needed to pressure state legislators to change their AI regulations?” said Theurer. “This came up in the previous moratorium fight, and some people were concerned that California would ignore budget threats related to BEAD, for example. It would take multiple budget eliminations or budget restrictions to really put pressure on a large state like California.”