The Trump administration issued an executive order directing the Justice Department to create an “AI Litigation Task Force” to sue states over AI-related laws, and instructing the Federal Trade Commission and Federal Communications Commission to coordinate with DOJ to implement a White House plan aimed at thwarting “onerous” state and local regulations.
The order also directs Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to study whether the department can withhold federal rural broadband funds from states that pass unfavorable AI laws.
At a signing ceremony, President Trump framed the move in geopolitical terms: “We have to be unified. China is unified because they have one vote, that’s President Xi. He says do it, and that’s the end of that.”
David Sacks, the administration’s AI adviser, said the administration will not challenge all state measures: “Kid safety, we’re going to protect. We’re not pushing back on that, but we’re going to push back on the most onerous examples of state regulations.” The order tasks Sacks with working with Congress on drafting national AI legislation.
Legal scholars and tech policy researchers say the order is likely to face court challenges and that the administration lacks authority to preempt state regulation without congressional authorization. John Bergmayer, legal director at Public Knowledge, said the White House appears to be “trying to find a way to bypass Congress” and called the theories in the order legally weak.
Some of Trump’s supporters criticized the move, including groups involved in bipartisan efforts to protect children from AI harms. Michael Toscano of the Institute for Family Studies called it “a huge lost opportunity” and said the administration excluded critical stakeholders. Adam Billen of Encode warned the order could chill state efforts to protect residents by creating “massive legal uncertainty,” benefiting companies.
Sacks indicated the federal government could rely on the commerce clause to override state laws. Bergmayer disagreed, noting states routinely regulate matters that affect interstate commerce and citing a 2023 Supreme Court decision upholding California’s regulation of the pork industry as precedent that states can regulate beyond their borders.
While Congress has stalled on national AI rules, dozens of states have passed AI-related laws addressing issues such as banning nonconsensual AI-generated nude images, requiring government agencies and businesses to disclose AI use, mandating checks for algorithmic discrimination, and protecting whistleblowers.
The administration has pushed for lighter regulation, citing competition with China. Trump recently permitted chipmaker Nvidia to sell its second-most advanced AI chips to China; Michael Sobolik of the Hudson Institute said such exports, depending on quantity, could dilute the U.S. advantage in AI.
Earlier this year, Republicans unsuccessfully tried to insert an AI preemption into the defense spending bill. A leaked earlier draft of the executive order had already provoked bipartisan opposition. In July, the Senate removed an AI moratorium from a reconciliation bill.
Republicans are split on AI policy. Sen. Ted Cruz, who proposed a moratorium during reconciliation negotiations, stood with Trump at the signing. Other GOP lawmakers pushed back: Sen. Josh Hawley called the provision “terrible,” and many Republican governors opposed the preemption idea. Utah Gov. Spencer Cox favored an alternative order that would not bar state laws. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis posted that “An executive order doesn’t/can’t preempt state legislative action,” adding that only Congress could theoretically preempt states through legislation.
NPR’s Bobby Allyn contributed reporting.