2026-10-26 · contested story

The Hidden Costs of AI Preemption - The Regulatory Review

The core story is a fast-moving fight over who gets to write the rules for artificial intelligence. After the Senate stripped a ten-year federal moratorium on state AI laws from the 'One Big Beautiful Bill' in a 99-1 vote, the Trump administration pivoted to executive action: a December 2025 executive order directing the Justice Department to sue states with 'onerous' AI laws, a White House legislative framework urging Congress to 'preempt state AI laws that impose undue burdens,' and renewed attempts to attach preemption language to must-pass bills like the NDAA. Tech advocates and the administration argue a '50-state patchwork' stifles innovation and cedes the AI race to China; consumer advocates, safety researchers, and a bipartisan bloc of state lawmakers argue states are essential 'laboratories' protecting citizens from job loss, child-safety harms, surveillance, and rising energy bills while Congress stalls. The debate is embedded in a decades-old pattern of preemption battles over minimum wage, abortion, guns, food safety, and climate.

How each side frames it

left
"Big Tech has built a nine-figure war chest full of carrots and sticks. When state Assemblyman Alex Bores wrote New York's AI safety law and ran for Congress, tech giants promised to make an example of him (their words!), and Leading the Future and affiliated PACs spent more than $8 million to beat him in his primary."
"Because of the political paralysis in Congress, [states] are the ones that are leading the thinking and development of what AI regulation should look like. Preempting state regulation should give us all pause."
"In almost all instances, preemption is a deliberate state government-sanctioned corporate takeover to boost private profiteering by suppressing local government power, community groups and citizens."
"most Americans have the common sense to oppose anyone having the power to build a machine for private profit that creates the risk of human extinction. Nobody elected these companies, and they should not control the fate of humanity."
"What's been concerning to me about Lori Trahan is how well she fits into the 'in order to do X, we have to sacrifice on Y' school, which I think is just what the AI oligarchs want"
center
"The answer to the AI question is not 'hands off, do nothing,' nor is it 'shut it all down,'"
"there is consensus among Long Island's congressional delegation about the need for federal regulation despite industry leaders' and President Donald Trump's call for a more hands-off approach."
"I asked it how to kidnap a member of Congress, and it gave me a list, it gave me a plan on how to kidnap a member of Congress... There absolutely has to be guardrails. There has to be regulations."
"to protect consumers, workers, and national security while staying competitive with China and keeping America at the forefront of innovation."
right
"America will lose that race unless Congress steps up to protect national interests and the AI industry from a tsunami of state mandates."
"Drawing from the Biden administration's playbook—which blends DEI with European-style technocratic mandates—these states are advancing a heavy-handed regulatory agenda."
"You can't expect a company to get 50 Approvals every time they want to do something... AI WILL BE DESTROYED IN ITS INFANCY!"
"We need one national policy — not a 50-state patchwork of laws. This legislative proposal delivers on that."
"Change is hard, and change under pressure and at great speed is even harder. It's far easier, of course, to lobby political leaders to stop all change."

What each side left out

The right left out — covered by the The New Republic & CNN
The right left out — covered by the Los Angeles Times
The left left out — covered by the City Journal & The Washington Post
The left left out — covered by the City Journal
The center left out — covered by the The New Republic & Salon & NBC News
The center left out — covered by the Washington Post & Los Angeles Times

What's actually true?

[verified] The Senate voted 99-1 to strip a ten-year federal moratorium on state AI regulations from the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.
[verified] Trump signed an executive order in December 2025 directing the Justice Department / an AI Litigation Task Force to sue or challenge states that pass AI regulations, with states risking loss of federal broadband funding.
[verified] Four states — Colorado, California, Utah and Texas — have passed laws setting rules for AI across the private sector.
[verified] The White House framework says states should retain power to enforce laws of general applicability to protect children, prevent fraud, and protect consumers, and should not be preempted on data-center zoning.
[contested] Over 1,000 AI-related state and local laws / bills are pending nationwide, with one 2024 survey identifying 57 different state definitions of 'artificial intelligence.'
[verified] New York's RAISE Act, signed by Gov. Hochul, requires AI companies to report any incidents of dangerous actions by an AI model to the state within 72 hours.
[verified] Republican House members including Marjorie Taylor Greene and senators including Josh Hawley and Marsha Blackburn opposed the AI moratorium/preemption on states'-rights and child-safety grounds.
[verified] House Majority Leader Steve Scalise indicated an AI moratorium won't be included in the NDAA because the must-pass bill 'wasn't the best place for this to fit.'

The narrative clash

Whether federal preemption helps or hurts small/open-source developers
Left: could lead to the creation of a nationwide patchwork of rules that will constrain leading model developers, harm open-source projects that lack the funds to follow the plethora of new regulations
Right: it's a matter of 'legislative humility,' arguing that preemption assumes the federal approach is more correct than what states could legislate, a dangerous assumption given how fast the AI industry is changing
Whether the Trump executive order is lawful and effective
Left: Trump is not our king, and he cannot simply wave a pen to unilaterally invalidate state law
Right: This executive order that he's promised to come out is going to make it clear that there's one set of rules for AI companies in the US.
Whether preemption is a states'-rights violation (NOTE: intra-right disagreement, not left-vs-right)
Left: Stripping states of jurisdiction to regulate AI is a subsidy to Big Tech and will prevent states from protecting against online censorship of political speech, predatory applications that target children
Right: overregulation would stymie the ability of U.S.-based companies to compete with China

64 sources analyzed

The New Republic Bentham's Bulldog Newsday Just The News City Journal Salon Los Angeles Times Newsday The Dispatch City Journal The New Republic The Washington Post Newsday The Dispatch Fox News Salon CNN Newsday The Dispatch Fox News Mother Jones CNN Just The News Fox News The New Republic The Washington Post Investor's Business Daily City Journal Salon NBC News Just The News City Journal Salon Los Angeles Times Richmond Times-Dispatch The New Republic NBC News The Dispatch Mother Jones PBS NewsHour New York Post MSNBC Los Angeles Times Just The News Mother Jones Los Angeles Times Investor's Business Daily Mother Jones The Washington Post Richmond Times-Dispatch MSNBC PBS NewsHour Richmond Times-Dispatch The Washington Post Investor's Business Daily NBC News New York Post PBS NewsHour New York Post CNN New York Post CNN Investor's Business Daily NBC News

Perspectivity reads the coverage — not just who published it.

Read the full interactive analysis →