menu
close

State AGs Unite Against 10-Year AI Regulation Ban

A bipartisan coalition of 40 state attorneys general has strongly opposed a Republican proposal to impose a 10-year moratorium on state-level AI regulations. The measure, included in a budget reconciliation bill narrowly passed by the House, would preempt existing state AI laws in California, Colorado, New York, and other states. The AGs argue this would leave Americans unprotected from potential AI harms while Congress has failed to establish necessary federal guardrails.
State AGs Unite Against 10-Year AI Regulation Ban

State attorneys general from across the political spectrum are pushing back against a controversial provision that would halt state-level AI regulation for a decade.

The measure, part of the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" budget reconciliation package that passed the House by a slim 215-214 vote on May 22, would prevent states from enforcing any laws specifically targeting artificial intelligence systems for the next 10 years. If enacted, it would nullify existing AI regulations in states like California, which has implemented laws addressing AI-generated deepfakes, healthcare applications, and non-consensual explicit imagery.

"This moratorium would mean that even if a company deliberately designs an algorithm that causes foreseeable harm — regardless of how intentional or egregious the misconduct or how devastating the consequences — the company making that bad tech would be unaccountable to lawmakers and the public," the attorneys general wrote in their joint letter.

The proposal has created unusual political alignments. While supported by major tech companies like Google, which called it "an important first step to both protect national security and ensure continued American AI leadership," the moratorium faces opposition not only from Democrats but also from some Senate Republicans. Senator Marsha Blackburn (R-Tennessee) expressed concerns that it would override her state's ELVIS Act, which protects artists from AI deepfakes.

Proponents argue the moratorium would prevent a confusing patchwork of state regulations and give Congress time to develop comprehensive federal legislation. Adam Thierer of the R Street Institute, who first proposed the idea, testified that it "offers a smart way to address this problem by granting innovators some breathing space."

The measure's fate remains uncertain as it heads to the Senate, where it must clear the budget reconciliation process. The "Byrd rule" could pose a significant obstacle, as it restricts provisions deemed "extraneous" to the budget. Meanwhile, state lawmakers continue their work, with 48 states having introduced AI legislation in 2025 and 26 states already enacting at least 75 new AI measures.

Source: Pymnts

Latest News