Who gets to make the rules for artificial intelligence: Washington or your state capitol?
In 2026, state legislatures introduced dozens of bills on AI and children alone, and states including California, Texas, New York, Illinois and Colorado enacted broader AI laws. The federal government has taken a different approach: a national standard that it describes as “minimally burdensome,” and an effort to stop states from going further.
The Executive Order
On December 11, 2025, the President signed Executive Order 14365, Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence. Among other things, it:
- Directed the Attorney General to create an AI Litigation Task Force to challenge state AI laws, including on Commerce Clause and preemption grounds
- Directed the Commerce Department to identify state laws considered overly burdensome, citing Colorado’s AI Act as an example
- Asked the FTC and FCC to consider federal policies that could override conflicting state rules
- Carved out state laws on child safety, AI data center infrastructure and state government’s own use of AI
The Attorney General formally established the Task Force on January 9, 2026. In March, the White House sent Congress a short National Policy Framework recommending broad federal preemption, while preserving state powers in areas such as consumer protection and child safety.
Where Things Stand
An executive order cannot by itself overturn a state law. Only Congress, through legislation, or the courts can do that. As of late summer 2026, according to legal trackers:
- No federal preemption statute has been enacted
- No court has blocked or preempted a state AI law at the federal government’s request
- Public reporting does not show the Task Force filing a lawsuit against any state
- A bipartisan coalition of 36 state attorneys general has opposed broad preemption
Meanwhile, states have kept moving. Colorado replaced its 2024 AI Act with a narrower transparency law taking effect in 2027. Illinois enacted a frontier AI developer law in July 2026, and California, Texas and New York have their own frameworks in effect or underway.
The Constitutional Question
This is a classic federalism dispute. Supporters of preemption argue a patchwork of 50 state AI rulebooks burdens interstate commerce and slows American innovation in a global race. Opponents argue states are the “laboratories of democracy” and that, without a federal law on the books, preemption by executive action leaves citizens without protection from either level of government.
Both arguments have a basis in the Constitution. The Commerce Clause gives Congress power over interstate commerce, and the Tenth Amendment reserves to the states powers not delegated to the federal government. The decision ultimately belongs to Congress, and to the courts if Congress acts.
Keep Digging With Truth Agent
This article is a starting point. Truth Agent puts the public record at your fingertips, including the Constitution, federal law, regulations, court opinions and oversight reports, so you can follow executive orders, federal AI bills and court challenges without relying on anyone’s summary, including ours.
Read Next on Truth Trench
- The White House Asks Congress to Preempt State AI Laws: Inside the National AI Policy Framework
- Justice Department Stands Up an AI Litigation Task Force to Challenge State AI Laws
- AI Executive Order
