Compromise Necessary but Not Sufficient for AI Preemption

Even with involvement from all three branches of the federal government, preempting state AI laws will require bipartisan compromise. Representatives Jay Obernolte of California and Lori Trahan of Massachusetts released a draft of the Great American AI Act last week. The measure would establish a nationwide regulatory framework for artificial intelligence as the latest effort at federal preemption. In November 2025, President Trump stated that the United States must have one federal standard for AI instead of a patchwork of 50 state regulatory regimes. The following month, Trump issued an executive order directing agencies to complete preemption-focused initiatives by March 11. Only the Department of Justice met the deadline when it established an AI Litigation Task Force on January 9 to challenge state laws that unconstitutionally regulate interstate commerce or are preempted by federal rules. The Department of Commerce has not issued its evaluation of state AI laws or a policy notice that would make states with such measures ineligible for certain broadband funding. The delay has left the Federal Communications Commission unable to start a proceeding on a federal reporting standard for AI models. The Federal Trade Commission also missed its deadline for a policy statement on the application of consumer protection law to AI, with no statement released more than two months after an April indication that it would come out very soon. In April, the Justice Department task force secured its first court victory after X.AI sued Colorado to block enforcement of the state's AI Act. The department intervened in the case, after which the Colorado attorney general agreed to stay enforcement and a federal court issued a full block. Colorado lawmakers have advanced legislation to repeal and replace the original act with a narrower framework that Governor Polis is expected to sign. Lawsuits can address only one state law at a time and require proof that a statute is unconstitutional, often leading to complex and lengthy proceedings. The Trump administration has shifted its preemption strategy toward Congress. In March, the White House released a national policy framework that called on lawmakers to enact statutes preempting state AI laws that impose undue burdens. Congressional efforts include a draft TRUMP AMERICA AI Act from Senator Blackburn of Tennessee that would preempt conflicting state laws. Senators Young of Indiana and Cantwell of Washington have proposed the Future of AI Innovation Act to codify the Center for AI Standards and Innovation and direct it to develop voluntary best practices for federal agencies. The Great American AI Act from Obernolte and Trahan would preempt state regulation of artificial intelligence model development for three years after enactment while preserving state laws of general applicability and those covering post-deployment activities. The House Commission on AI and the Innovation Economy stated that the bill cannot serve as the basis for productive dialogue, and its co-chair has denounced efforts to preempt states. Anthropic has argued that any preemption should be construed narrowly with ambiguity resolved in favor of preserving state authority. Federal oversight of AI rests on policy and constitutional law, but Congress remains gridlocked on broad preemption measures, leaving states to regulate the technology.