In a move that could reshape America’s approach to artificial intelligence governance, President Donald Trump has announced plans to sign an executive order that would block states from creating their own AI regulations. This ‘ONE RULE’ approach has ignited a fierce debate about federal power, states’ rights, and the future of AI innovation in the United States.
Trump’s Executive Order: The ‘One Rulebook’ Vision
President Trump’s planned executive order represents a dramatic shift in how artificial intelligence might be regulated in America. “I will be doing a ONE RULE Executive Order this week,” Trump declared on social media. “You can’t expect a company to get 50 Approvals every time they want to do something. There must be only One Rulebook if we are going to continue to lead in AI.”
The order would create several mechanisms to enforce federal supremacy in AI regulation:
- •An “AI Litigation Task Force” to challenge state AI laws in court
- •Direction for federal agencies to evaluate state laws deemed “onerous”
- •Pushing the FCC and FTC toward national standards that override state rules
- •Elevating White House ‘AI czar’ David Sacks’ influence over policy
The Battle Over State AI Regulation
While Trump and Silicon Valley leaders argue for federal uniformity, many states have already moved forward with their own AI regulations. This patchwork of state AI regulation has emerged precisely because of the federal government’s slow response to AI’s rapid development.
| State | Key AI Regulation | Focus Area |
|---|---|---|
| California | SB 53 | AI safety and transparency |
| Tennessee | ELVIS Act | Protection against AI deepfakes |
| Multiple States | Various proposals | Consumer protection, bias prevention |
Proponents of state regulation argue that local governments are better positioned to address specific concerns within their jurisdictions. “States must retain the right to regulate and make laws on AI and anything else for the benefit of their state,” argued Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA).
Why Federal Preemption Faces Bipartisan Opposition
What makes this debate particularly explosive is the rare bipartisan agreement against federal preemption of state AI regulation. Earlier this year, Senator Ted Cruz’s proposal for a 10-year moratorium on AI legislation was rejected 99-1 in the Senate.
Republican governors have been particularly vocal in their opposition:
- •Florida Governor Ron DeSantis warned that federal preemption would “prevent FL from enacting important protections for individuals, children and families”
- •Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL) advised Trump to “leave AI to the states” to preserve federalism
- •Over 35 state attorneys general warned Congress that overriding state AI laws could have “disastrous consequences”
The Silicon Valley Perspective on AI Policy
Technology leaders have been pushing for federal uniformity in artificial intelligence regulation for years. Figures like OpenAI President Greg Brockman and White House ‘AI czar’ David Sacks argue that multiple state regulations create an impossible compliance burden that could:
- Stifle innovation by forcing companies to navigate 50 different regulatory regimes
- Threaten America’s competitive edge against China in the AI race
- Create legal uncertainty that discourages investment in AI development
However, critics counter that Silicon Valley’s lobbying has successfully blocked meaningful technology regulation for years, and that state experimentation could actually lead to better, more responsive AI policy.
The Real-World Stakes of Artificial Intelligence Governance
Behind the political debate lie genuine concerns about AI’s impact on society. Recent incidents highlight why many believe regulation is necessary:
- •Several deaths by suicide following prolonged conversations with AI chatbots
- •Psychologists reporting cases of “AI psychosis” from excessive AI interaction
- •Growing concerns about AI-generated deepfakes and misinformation
- •Questions about AI bias and discrimination in hiring, lending, and law enforcement
These concerns have driven state lawmakers to act where the federal government has not. More than 200 state legislators have signed an open letter opposing federal preemption, arguing it would set back progress on AI safety.
What Happens Next in the AI Regulation Battle?
The conflict over Trump’s executive order raises fundamental questions about American governance in the age of artificial intelligence:
- •Can the federal government effectively preempt state laws in an area as complex as AI?
- •Will courts uphold such broad assertions of federal authority?
- •How will this affect America’s position in the global AI race against China?
- •What protections will consumers have if state regulations are blocked?
The coming weeks will test whether Trump can implement his “One Rulebook” vision against substantial political and legal headwinds.
FAQs About Trump’s AI Executive Order
What exactly would Trump’s executive order do?
The order would create mechanisms to challenge state AI laws in court, direct federal agencies to evaluate state regulations, and push for national standards that override state rules.
Which states have already passed AI regulations?
California has passed SB 53 focusing on AI safety and transparency, while Tennessee’s ELVIS Act protects against unauthorized AI deepfakes of voices and likenesses.
Who supports federal preemption of state AI laws?
Silicon Valley leaders including OpenAI President Greg Brockman and White House ‘AI czar’ David Sacks argue that multiple state regulations would stifle innovation.
Who opposes federal preemption?
A bipartisan coalition including Governor Ron DeSantis, Senator Marco Rubio, and over 35 state attorneys general argue states should retain regulatory authority.
What happens if the executive order is challenged in court?
Legal experts anticipate prolonged litigation over the limits of federal preemption power, potentially reaching the Supreme Court.
Conclusion: A Defining Moment for American AI Leadership
The battle over Trump’s executive order represents more than just a policy dispute—it’s a fundamental clash over how America will govern transformative technologies in the 21st century. The outcome will determine whether artificial intelligence development follows a single federal framework or evolves through state-level experimentation and regulation. As AI continues to reshape every aspect of society, this debate over who gets to make the rules may prove as consequential as the technology itself.