Key Points
- Congress rejects a proposal to block state AI regulations in the defense appropriations bill.
- House Majority Leader Steve Scalise says Republicans will look for other venues for the measure.
- The effort follows a failed attempt to embed a ten‑year moratorium on state AI laws in a tax and spending bill.
- Silicon Valley supports federal preemption to avoid a patchwork of state rules.
- Critics argue state laws address safety, transparency, and consumer protection, and a ban would hand oversight to big tech.
- Former President Trump has backed the preemption and considered an executive order, though actions have paused.
Legislative Push to Block State AI Regulation Stalls
Congress has once again rejected a bid to embed a provision that would prevent states from enacting their own artificial intelligence regulations into a broader legislative package. The proposal, which sought inclusion in the annual defense appropriations bill, encountered bipartisan resistance and was ultimately set aside.
House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R‑LA) announced that Republican leaders would explore “other places” to introduce the measure, echoing former President Trump’s prior calls to pursue the ban as a separate piece of legislation. This statement came after the defense bill proved to be an unsuitable venue for the provision.
Background and Prior Attempts
The current effort follows earlier attempts by GOP lawmakers to insert a ten‑year moratorium on state AI laws into a tax and spending bill earlier in the year. That earlier provision also failed after strong opposition from both parties, illustrating the difficulty of securing a federal preemption of state authority in the rapidly evolving AI sector.
Industry and Advocacy Perspectives
Silicon Valley has expressed support for federal preemption, arguing that a fragmented landscape of state regulations creates an unworkable patchwork that could stifle innovation and burden tech companies with varying compliance requirements across jurisdictions.
Critics, however, contend that most state AI legislation focuses on essential issues such as safety, transparency, and consumer protection. They argue that in the absence of comprehensive federal AI statutes that address these concerns, blocking state action would effectively cede oversight to large technology firms without adequate public safeguards.
Potential Future Moves
While the defense bill avenue has been closed, Republican leaders indicated they would continue to seek alternative legislative paths for the preemption proposal. A leaked draft executive order suggested that former President Trump was considering unilateral action on the matter, though those efforts have reportedly paused for the time being.
The ongoing debate underscores the tension between fostering technological innovation and ensuring responsible oversight, a balance that policymakers, industry stakeholders, and consumer advocates will continue to navigate as AI technologies mature.
Source: techcrunch.com