The Trump administration issued an executive order creating an “AI Litigation Task Force” at the Justice Department to sue states over certain AI-related laws and directed the Federal Trade Commission and Federal Communications Commission to coordinate with the DOJ to implement a White House plan aimed at blocking what it called “onerous” state and local regulations.
The order also instructs Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to study whether the department can withhold federal rural broadband funds from states that pass AI laws the administration deems unfavorable.
At the signing, President Trump framed the move in geopolitical terms, saying the United States must be unified in the face of competition from China. David Sacks, the administration’s AI adviser, said the effort will not target every state measure, noting the administration intends to protect child-safety rules while pushing back on the most burdensome state regulations. Sacks was charged with working with Congress on drafting national AI legislation.
Legal scholars and tech policy researchers say the order is likely to face court challenges. They argue the White House lacks authority to preempt state regulation without explicit congressional authorization. John Bergmayer, legal director at Public Knowledge, said the administration appears to be trying to bypass Congress and called the legal theories in the order weak.
Some groups that support the administration on other issues criticized the move. Michael Toscano of the Institute for Family Studies called it a missed opportunity that excluded key stakeholders. Adam Billen of Encode warned the order could chill state efforts to protect residents by creating widespread legal uncertainty that would benefit companies.
Sacks suggested the federal government could rely on the Commerce Clause to override state laws. Bergmayer disagreed, noting that states often regulate activities affecting interstate commerce and pointing to a 2023 Supreme Court decision that upheld California regulation of the pork industry as precedent that states can impose laws with out-of-state effects.
While Congress has not passed comprehensive national AI rules, dozens of states have enacted AI-related laws addressing topics such as bans on nonconsensual AI-generated nude images, disclosure requirements for government agencies and businesses that use AI, mandates to check algorithms for discrimination, and protections for whistleblowers.
The administration has pushed for lighter federal regulation, citing competition with China. Recently, President Trump allowed chipmaker Nvidia to sell its second-most-advanced AI chips to China; Michael Sobolik of the Hudson Institute cautioned that depending on quantities allowed, such exports could erode the U.S. lead in AI.
Earlier this year, Republicans unsuccessfully tried to insert an AI preemption into the defense spending bill. A leaked draft of the executive order had already drawn bipartisan opposition, and the Senate removed an AI moratorium from a reconciliation bill in July.
Republicans are divided over the approach. Sen. Ted Cruz joined Trump at the signing and has supported measures like a moratorium during negotiations, while other GOP lawmakers pushed back—Sen. Josh Hawley called the preemption provision “terrible,” and several Republican governors opposed it. Utah Gov. Spencer Cox favored an alternative that would not bar state laws. Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis posted that an executive order cannot preempt state legislative action and said only Congress could theoretically enact federal preemption through legislation.
Reporting contributed by NPR’s Bobby Allyn.