By FOCUS, A Leonine Business
As artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more powerful and widespread, the U.S. Congress is exploring a plan to stop states from passing their own AI laws – opening a national debate over who should shape the future of AI in America. A provision in Republican President Donald Trump’s “One big beautiful bill Act” would impose a 10-year moratorium on the enforcement of “any law or regulation regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems.” The move comes as states increasingly look to regulate AI. This year over 1,000 bills relating to AI have been introduced in 49 states and the District of Columbia.
In 2024, Colorado lawmakers passed SB 205, the nation’s first comprehensive law regulating AI, set to take effect February 1, 2026, that will require developers and deployers of AI systems to use reasonable care to protect consumers from algorithmic discrimination. The law will also require various disclosures to consumers. In California, numerous laws have been enacted regulating AI including, but not limited to, AB 2013/Chapter 817, which will require developers of AI systems to post documentation regarding the data used to train the AI system. Other laws include SB 926/Chapter 289, relating to deepfakes, and AB 2355/Chapter 260, which mandates disclosures on political advertising generated or specifically altered by AI.
The Trump administration has previously expressed reluctance to regulate the growing industry with Republican Vice President J.D. Vance noting in February remarks that “excessive regulation of the AI sector could kill a transformative industry just as it’s taking off, and we’ll make every effort to encourage growth AI policies.” The moratorium provision was included in a markup by the House Energy and Commerce Committee with Chair Rep. Brett Guthrie, R-Kentucky, calling the proposal “a package that unleashes American energy dominance, advances innovation, and protects access to care for our most vulnerable.”
The move has drawn bipartisan opposition from a coalition of over 40 state attorney’s general who noted in a letter to congressional leaders that “imposing a broad moratorium on all state action while Congress fails to act in this area is irresponsible and deprives consumers of reasonable protections.” Similarly the National Conference of State Legislatures sent a letter to the House Energy and Commerce Committee opposing that the provision is an “infringement on states’ authority to effectively legislate in this rapidly evolving and consequential policy domain and in our view, is a violation of the Byrd Rule.”
According to the Democrats of the House Budget Committee, the rule named for the late West Virginia senator prohibits the inclusion of extraneous provisions in reconciliation bills. Senate Republicans, including Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, and Sen. Bernie Moreno, R-Ohio, have expressed skepticism that the provision will pass the Bryd Rule, the Associated Press reports. While the provision faces uncertain prospects in the U.S. Senate, one thing that remains clear is that state efforts to regulate AI will only increase. FOCUS will continue to monitor developments on AI legislation in state legislatures across the country.
by Austin Young – 5/20/25
