Trump’s AI Order Draws Legal Threats, Bipartisan Backlash and Industry Applause

Utah Rep. Doug Fiefia, the Republican co-chair of the Future Caucus’ AI task force of bipartisan state legislators (see 2507220025); Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser (D); Vermont Rep. Monique Priestley (D); several Connecticut Democrats; and California Consumer Privacy Agency Executive Director Tom Kemp came out in opposition. Fiefia and Weiser said the EO is unconstitutional, with Fiefia citing the 10th Amendment.

The EO sets up an AI Litigation Task Force within DOJ to challenge “onerous” state AI laws that conflict with a statement in the order that says it’s “the policy of the United States to sustain and enhance the United States’ global AI dominance through a minimally burdensome national policy framework for AI.” The order carves out roles for the FTC and the FCC, as expected (see 2511200051).

A spokesman for Weiser on Friday cited his November letter to Congress saying that while there’s room for improvement on Colorado’s comprehensive AI law, set to take effect in February, the federal government’s attempts to coerce policy change through “intimidation and the illegal withholding of funds" is "unlawful and unconstitutional.” Weiser’s letter, concerning reports about the draft version of the EO, said that if the administration proceeds, “we will again turn to the courts to defend the rule of law and protect the people of Colorado.”

Fiefia, the Utah Republican, said Trump's EO “is an overreaching act that fundamentally disregards the Tenth Amendment and the necessary role of the States in technology governance." Though Fiefia said he supports "a singular national framework," such a regime "must be developed through the proper legislative process in Congress to ensure full debate and transparency, not through unilateral action that threatens state funding with no federal standard to replace it with.”

He added, “States must retain their authority as ‘laboratories of democracy.'" Since AI is evolving rapidly, "States are closer to the ground and uniquely positioned to adjust quickly and develop tailored regulations," Fiefia argued. "Bypassing Congress undermines policy stability and dangerously ignores the need for critical state guardrails. Only through the legislative process can we achieve a national standard genuinely aligned to the needs of all fifty states and promote responsible, enduring AI leadership.”

“Blocking common sense state level safeguards does not foster innovation,” said CalPrivacy's Kemp. “It leaves Americans vulnerable to known harms and creates mistrust in AI and government.”

But tech industry groups applauded the president. NetChoice said Trump was right to point out how “startups and small businesses will greatly struggle to create and compete with a 50-state patchwork of red tape.” The association noted its track record in pursuing legal action against laws that violate the First Amendment and said it stands “ready to assist the Trump administration in this endeavor.”

Software Information Industry Association Executive Vice President Paul Lekas said a “clear federal framework, including appropriate preemption, is essential to avoid a fragmented patchwork of state laws that would create uncertainty, increase compliance costs, and disproportionately hinder innovation.”

The order requires FCC Chairman Brendan Carr to begin a proceeding within 90 days “to determine whether to adopt a Federal reporting and disclosure standard for AI models that preempts conflicting State laws.” It would also order the FTC to “issue a policy statement on the application of the FTC Act's prohibition on unfair and deceptive practices … to AI models.” Carr on Friday hailed the order and later indicated the FCC will “be initiating a proceeding to determine whether to adopt a Federal reporting and disclosure standard for AI models that preempts conflicting State laws.”

Trump’s order “promotes America’s leadership in AI and advances our nation’s economic and national security interests,” Carr said. “It does so by targeting excessive state regulations that would not only hold America back but insert ideological bias into AI models.” Trump’s “decisive action also ensures a policy framework that protects children, prevents online censorship, respects copyrights, and safeguards communities,” Carr said.

Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz, R-Texas, attended Trump’s signing ceremony Thursday alongside Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, Ai and crypto adviser David Sacks, senior AI policy adviser Sriram Krishnan, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and others. Cruz called the EO an “important step today to promote American leadership in AI.”

Ranking member Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., called for passage of a bipartisan national AI framework to protect innovation and consumers: “This executive order’s overly broad preemption threatens states with lawsuits and funding cuts for protecting their residents from AI-powered frauds, scams, and deepfakes -- leaving American consumers without any protection.”

Vermont's Priestley, the Future Caucus AI task force’s Democratic co-chair, also opposed the EO. “An executive order can’t erase states’ constitutional duty to protect our constituents,” she told us in a text message. “Bipartisan state lawmakers have been building practical AI guardrails in the name of consumer protection, public safety, and national security, and we won’t stop now.”

Trump’s action also took flak from Connecticut Senate Democratic leaders and Sen. James Maroney (D), who sponsored comprehensive AI legislation. In a joint news release, Maroney said, “With the gridlock in DC, states have been the only ones to act to defend their residents from harms of social media, and this executive order would prevent states from acting to defend their residents from potential harms of AI.” Maroney added, “We will not harness the full potential of this technology until the majority of people feel safe in using it, and this order is a major step in the wrong direction.”

Connecticut Senate President Martin Looney (D) said stopping state AI regulation “exposes people to dangerous decisions, allows companies to operate without accountability, increases the likelihood of errors, and widens inequality. We will continue to champion strong, thoughtful regulation that ensures the public feels safe using these powerful technologies.”

Connecticut Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff (D) said Trump’s EO is about "enriching millionaires and billionaires at the expense of working people." He added, "Executive orders are not law, and this unconstitutional overreach will be challenged in court.”