Ask Onix
Trump administration moves to centralize AI oversight
U.S. President Donald Trump signed an executive order on Thursday aimed at preventing states from enforcing their own artificial intelligence (AI) regulations, framing the move as a step toward national consistency in oversight.
Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office, Trump stated, "We want to have one central source of approval." The order equips the federal government with mechanisms to challenge what it deems overly restrictive state-level AI rules, according to White House AI adviser David Sacks. However, Sacks clarified that the administration would not oppose regulations focused on protecting children.
Tech industry welcomes federal preemption
The executive order is seen as a victory for major technology companies, which have long advocated for a unified U.S. approach to AI regulation. Industry leaders argue that a patchwork of state laws could stifle innovation and weaken America's competitive edge against China in the rapidly evolving AI sector. Billions of dollars are being invested in AI development, with firms emphasizing the need for regulatory clarity.
The BBC has reached out to leading AI companies, including OpenAI, Google, Meta, and Anthropic, for comment on the order.
States and advocates push back
The announcement has sparked opposition, particularly from states that have already implemented their own AI regulations. California, home to many of the world's largest tech firms, has been at the forefront of such efforts. Governor Gavin Newsom, a vocal critic of Trump, condemned the order in a statement, accusing the president of prioritizing personal gain over public safety.
"Today, President Trump continued his ongoing grift in the White House, attempting to enrich himself and his associates, with a new executive order seeking to preempt state laws protecting Americans from unregulated AI technology."
California Governor Gavin Newsom
Earlier this year, Newsom signed legislation requiring major AI developers to disclose plans for mitigating risks associated with their models. He has argued that California's approach could serve as a model for federal lawmakers. Other states, including Colorado and New York, have also enacted AI regulations.
Debate over federal vs. state authority
Critics of the executive order contend that state-level regulations are necessary in the absence of robust federal safeguards. Julie Scelfo, representing the advocacy group Mothers Against Media Addiction, stated that the order undermines states' rights to protect their residents.
"Stripping states from enacting their own AI safeguards undermines states' basic rights to establish sufficient guardrails to protect their residents."
Julie Scelfo, Mothers Against Media Addiction
However, Michael Goodyear, an associate professor at New York Law School, argued that conflicting state laws could harm the U.S. AI industry. "It would be better to have one federal law than a bunch of conflicting state laws," he told the BBC, though he cautioned that this assumes a well-crafted federal framework would emerge.
Tech lobby applauds move
The tech industry's lobbying group, NetChoice, praised the executive order. Patrick Hedger, the group's director of policy, expressed optimism about collaborating with the White House and Congress to establish nationwide standards.
"We look forward to working with the White House and Congress to set nationwide standards and a clear rulebook for innovators."
Patrick Hedger, NetChoice
