Presidential AI Order at Odds with State Approach
President Donald Trump’s Executive Order on artificial intelligence (AI) creates a collision course with current or expected regulatory approaches in Florida and other states. Just days after Florida Governor Ron DeSantis announced an “AI Bill of Rights” setting forth priorities for the state’s 2026 legislative session, President Trump issued an executive order seeking to eliminate varying state-based regulation.
Why did the President issue the December 11, 2025, Executive Order?
The Executive Order asserts that United States leadership in AI will foster national and economic security. The Executive Order seeks to advance a federal regulatory framework for AI and remove barriers associated with its adoption. The order refers to “excessive State regulation” as an impediment to the advancement of the U.S. leadership position. According to the order, state-based regulation “by definition creates a patchwork of 50 different regulatory regimes.” This, in turn, creates challenges for regulatory compliance and limits opportunities for start-up businesses.
The Executive Order further asserts that state-based regulations improperly embed ideological biases within the models. The order cites a Colorado law that bans “algorithmic discrimination,” which the order indicates might “force AI models to produce false results.”
What is the goal of the Executive Order?
The Executive Order seeks collaboration between President Trump’s administration and Congress in pursuit of a “minimally burdensome national standard” for AI development and implementation. In doing so, the Executive Order asserts that the national framework must forbid inconsistent state laws. The Executive Order also refers to goals in several key areas– protecting children, preventing censorship, respecting copyrights and safeguarding communities.
How does the Executive Order seek to achieve these objectives?
The Executive Order first directs the Attorney General to establish an AI Litigation Task Force that will challenge state AI laws that are inconsistent with the public policy set forth in the order. The order further requires the Secretary of Commerce to lead an effort to publish an evaluation of onerous state AI laws that conflict with the federal policy. This includes laws that require AI models to alter their truthful outputs or may compel AI developers to disclose or report information in a manner that would violate the First Amendment. The Secretary of Commerce’s work may include referring state laws to the Attorney General’s task force for possible challenge.
Will states be subject to enforcement mechanisms other than litigation?
The Secretary of Commerce is tasked with issuing a Policy Notice specifying the conditions under which states may be eligible for remaining funding under the Broadband Equity Access and Deployment (BEAD) Program. The Policy Notice will provide that states with onerous AI laws are ineligible for non-deployed funds.
Further, executive agencies will assess their discretionary grant programs to determine whether the agencies may condition grants on states not enacting AI laws that conflict with the policy of the Executive Order or, for existing laws, entering into agreements to not enforce those laws.
Will the Executive Order result in further regulatory action by federal authorities?
Under the order, the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission will initiate a proceeding to determine whether to adopt a federal reporting and disclosure standard for AI models that preempts conflicting state laws. In addition, the Executive Order directs the Chairman of the Federal Trade Commission to issue a policy statement on the application of the Federal Trade Commission Act’s prohibition on unfair and deceptive acts or practices to AI models. The policy statement must explain the circumstances under which state laws that require alterations to the truthful outputs of AI models are preempted by the prohibition on engaging in deceptive practices affecting commerce.
What is Congress’ role following the Executive Order?
The order directs the Special Advisor for AI and Crypto and the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology to jointly prepare a legislative recommendation establishing a uniform federal policy framework for AI that preempts state AI laws conflicting with the Executive Order. The recommendations will not propose to preempt otherwise lawful state AI laws relating topics such as child safety protections, AI computing and data center infrastructure, and state government procurements and use of AI.