U.S. House Republicans aim to ban state-level AI laws for 10 years

by Paige Gross, West Virginia Watch
May 19, 2025

A footnote in a budget bill U.S. House Republicans are trying to pass before Memorial Day is the first major signal for how Congress may address artificial intelligence legislation, as they seek to create a moratorium on any AI laws at the state level for 10 years.

The measure, advanced Wednesday as part of the House Energy & Commerce Committee’s budget reconciliation proposal, says a state may not enforce any law or regulation on AI models and systems, or automated decision-making systems in the next 10 years. Exceptions would include laws that “remove legal impediments to, or facilitate the deployment or operation of” AI systems.

“No one believes that AI should be unregulated,” said California Rep. Jay Obernolte, a Republican member of the Subcommittee on Communications and Technology, during a markup Wednesday. But he said he believes that responsibility should fall to Congress, not the states. 

The AI law moratorium was packaged with a budget line item proposing to spend $500 million modernizing federal IT programs with commercial AI systems through 2035.

This move by House Republicans is not really out of left field, said Travis Hall, director for State Engagement at tech policy and governance organization Center for Democracy and Technology. Many have been itching to create a preemptive federal law to supersede AI legislation in the states.

At a Senate Commerce Committee session earlier this month, Chairman Ted Cruz, a Texas Republican, said it was in his plans to create “a regulatory sandbox for AI” that would prevent state overregulation and promote the United States’ AI industry. OpenAI CEO Sam Altman, once open to AI regulations, testified that the country’s lack of regulation is what contributed to his success.

“I think it is no accident that that’s happening in America again and again and again, but we need to make sure that we build our systems and that we set our policy in a way where that continues to happen,” Altman said.  

As the language of the bill stands, Congress would prohibit enforcement of any existing laws on AI and decision-making systems, and nullify any potential laws that could be put forth over the next decade, Hall said. Though they discussed AI research last year, Congress has not put forward any guidelines or regulations on AI.

“I will say what feels very different and new about this particular provision … both in terms of conversations about artificial intelligence and in terms of other areas of tech and telecom policy, is the complete lack of any regulatory structure that would actually be preempting the state law,” Hall said.

States have been developing their own laws around AI and decision-making systems — software that helps analyze and sort data, commonly used for job applications, mortgage lending, banking and in other industries — over the last few years as they await federal legislation. At least 550 AI bills have been introduced across 45 states and Puerto Rico in 2025, the National Conference of State Legislatures reported.

Many of these state laws regulate how AI intertwines with data privacy, transparency and discrimination. Others regulate how children can access these tools, how they can be used in election processes and surround the concept of deepfakes, or computer-generated likenesses of real people.

While lawmakers from both sides of the aisle have called for federal AI legislation, Hall said he thinks industry pressure and President Donald Trump’s deregulated tech stance won’t allow Congress to effectively act on a preemptive law — “states are stepping into that vacuum themselves.”

On Friday, 40 state attorneys general signed a bipartisan letter to Congress opposing the limitation on state AI legislation. The letter urged Congress to develop a federal framework for AI governance for “high risk” systems that promotes transparency, testing and tool assessment, in addition to state legislation. The letter said existing laws were developed “over years through careful consideration and extensive stakeholder input from consumers, industry, and advocates.”

“In the face of Congressional inaction on the emergence of real-world harms raised by the use of AI, states are likely to be the forum for addressing such issues,” the letter said. “This bill would directly harm consumers, deprive them of rights currently held in many states, and prevent State AGs from fulfilling their mandate to protect consumers.”  

A widesweeping AI bill in California was vetoed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last year, citing similar industry pressure. Senate Bill 1047 would have required safety testing of costly AI models to determine whether they would likely lead to mass death, endanger public infrastructure or enable severe cyberattacks.

Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, a Bay Area Democrat, has found more success with the Automated Decisions Safety Act this year, but said as a regulatory lawyer, she would favor having a federal approach.

“We don’t have a Congress that is going to do what our communities want, and so in the absence of their action, the states are stepping up,” she said.

The moratorium would kill the Automated Decisions Safety Act and nullify all of California’s AI legislation, as well as landmark laws like Colorado’s which will go into effect in February. State Rep. Brianna Titone, a sponsor of Colorado’s law, said people are hungry for some regulation.

“A 10 year moratorium of time is astronomical in terms of how quickly this technology is being developed,” she said in an email to States Newsroom. “To have a complete free-for-all on AI with no safeguards puts citizens at risk of situations we haven’t yet conceived of.”

Hall is skeptical that this provision will advance fully, saying he feels legislators will have a hard time trying to justify this moratorium in a budget bill relating to updating aging IT systems. But it’s a clear indication that the focus of this Congress is on deregulation, not accountability, he said.

“I do think that it’s unfortunate that the first statement coming out is one of abdication of responsibility,” Hall said, “as opposed to stepping up and doing the hard work of actually putting in place common sense and, like, actual protections for people that allows for innovation.”

West Virginia Watch is part of States Newsroom, a nonprofit news network supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. West Virginia Watch maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Leann Ray for questions: info@westvirginiawatch.com.

The post U.S. House Republicans aim to ban state-level AI laws for 10 years appeared first on westvirginiawatch.com

Note: The following A.I. based commentary is not part of the original article, reproduced above, but is offered in the hopes that it will promote greater media literacy and critical thinking, by making any potential bias more visible to the reader –Staff Editor.

Political Bias Rating: Center-Right

This content presents information about a legislative effort led by House Republicans to impose a moratorium on state AI regulations, framing it within the context of federal preemption and deregulation. It highlights perspectives favoring market-driven innovation and federal control (typically associated with conservative or center-right views), as well as concerns raised by Democrats, state officials, and advocacy groups about consumer protections and AI safety. The article balances reporting on Republican initiatives and Democratic/state opposition without heavy editorializing, but the emphasis on Republican leadership and deregulation agenda suggests a center-right slant.

SUMMARY: Windy conditions are expected to continue across southern West Virginia through tonight and into tomorrow, with wind gusts reaching up to 50 mph in higher terrain. The winds will start to ease by tomorrow evening but remain breezy during the day. There are no rain chances until Tuesday, when rain is expected to return and last through Thursday. Temperatures will be mild, reaching the low 70s in most areas, with cooler weather and a temperature drop forecasted for next weekend. The region is also experiencing a level one drought, though rain may help alleviate the situation.

FOLLOW US ON FACEBOOK AND TWITTER:
https://facebook.com/WOAYNewsWatch
https://twitter.com/WOAYNewsWatch

Source

SUMMARY: Judge Irene Burgger granted a preliminary injunction reinstating NYOSH employees to ensure legally required black lung screenings continue. Coal miners like Mark Pal view these screenings as lifesaving, preventing miners from deteriorating unnoticed. Harry Wy, a Canala County coal miner, filed a lawsuit against Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. after NYOSH job cuts were announced. His attorney, Sam Pesong, emphasized the legal requirement for these programs to remain accessible unless replaced. On May 7th, miners and employees testified in Charleston, influencing the judge’s decision. Pal urges miners to get annual lung X-rays, highlighting early detection’s importance in saving lives.

Judge Irene Berger granted a preliminary injunction Tuesday afternoon that would temporarily reinstate employees at the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, ensuring legally required black lung screenings would still take place. For miners like Mark Powell, those screenings are lifesaving.

FULL STORY: https://wchstv.com/news/local/coal-miners-happy-with-federal-judges-decision-in-niosh-injunction#

_________________________________________

For the latest local and national news, visit our website: https://wchstv.com/
Sign up for our newsletter: https://wchstv.com/sign-up

Follow WCHS-TV on social media:
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/eyewitnessnewscharleston/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/wchs8fox11​
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/wchs8fox11/

Source