News from the South - Virginia News Feed

European Union AI regulation is both model and warning for U.S. lawmakers, experts say

Published

2 months ago

May 30, 2025

virginiamercury.com – Paige Gross – 2025-05-30 07:38:00

by Paige Gross, Virginia Mercury
May 30, 2025

The European Union’s landmark AI Act, which went into effect last year, stands as inspiration for some U.S. legislators looking to enact widespread consumer protections. Others use it as a cautionary tale warning against overregulation leading to a less competitive digital economy.

The European Union enacted its law to prevent what is currently happening in the U.S. — a patchwork of AI legislation throughout the states — said Sean Heather, senior vice president for international regulatory affairs and antitrust at the Chamber of Commerce during an exploratory congressional subcommittee hearing on May 21.

“America’s AI innovators risk getting squeezed between the so-called Brussels Effect of overzealous European regulation and the so-called Sacramento Effect of excessive state and local mandates,” said Adam Thierer, a Senior Fellow at think tank R Street Institute, at the hearing.

The EU’s AI Act is comprehensive, and puts regulatory responsibility on developers of AI to mitigate risk of harm by the systems. It also requires developers to provide technical documentation and training summaries of its models for review by EU officials. The U.S. adopting similar policies would kick the country out of its first-place position in the Global AI race, Thierer testified.

The “Brussels Effect,” Thierer mentioned, is the idea that the EU’s regulations will influence the global market. But not much of the world has followed suit — so far Canada, Brazil and Peru are working on similar laws, but the UK and countries like Australia, New Zealand, Switzerland, Singapore, and Japan have taken a less restrictive approach.

When Jeff Le, founder of tech policy consultancy 100 Mile Strategies LLC, talks to lawmakers on each side of the aisle, he said he hears that they don’t want another country’s laws deciding American rules.

“Maybe there’s a place for it in our regulatory debate,” Le said. “But I think the point here is American constituents should be overseen by American rules, and absent those rules, it’s very complicated.”

Does the EU AI act keep Europe from competing?

Critics of the AI Act say the language is overly broad, which slows down the development of AI systems as they aim to meet regulatory requirements. France and Germany rank in the top 10 global AI leaders, and China is second, according to Stanford’s AI Index, but the U.S. currently leads by a wide margin in the number of leading AI models and its AI research, experts testified before the congressional committee.

University of Houston Law Center professor Peter Salib said he believes the EU’s AI Act is a factor — but not the only one — in keeping European countries out of the top spots. First, the law has only been in effect for about nine months, which wouldn’t be long enough to make as much of an impact on Europe’s ability to participate in the global AI economy, he said.

Secondly, the EU AI act is one piece of the overall attitude about digital protection in Europe, Salib said. The General Data Protection Regulation, a law that went into effect in 2018 and gives individuals control over their personal information, follows a similar strict regulatory mindset.

“It’s part of a much longer-term trend in Europe that prioritizes things like privacy and transparency really, really highly,” Salib said. “Which is, for Europeans, good — if that’s what they want, but it does seem to have serious costs in terms of where innovation happens.”

Stavros Gadinis, a professor at the Berkeley Center for Law and Business who has worked in the U.S. and Europe, said he thinks most of the concerns around innovation in the EU are outside the AI Act. Their tech labor market isn’t as robust as the U.S., and it can’t compete with the major financing accessible by Silicon Valley and Chinese companies, he said.

“That is what’s keeping them, more than this regulation,” Gadinis said. “That and, the law hasn’t really had the chance to have teeth yet.”

During the May 21 hearing, Rep. Lori Trahan, a Democrat from Massachusetts, called the Republican’s stance — that any AI regulation would kill tech startups and growing companies — “a false choice.”

The U.S. heavily invests in science and innovation, has founder-friendly immigration policies, has lenient bankruptcy laws and a “cultural tolerance for risk taking.” All policies the EU does not offer, Trahan said.

“It is therefore false and disingenuous to blame EU’s tech regulation for its low number of major tech firms,” Trahan said. “The story is much more complicated, but just as the EU may have something to learn from United States innovation policy, we’d be wise to study their approach to protecting consumers online.”

Self-governance

The EU’s law puts a lot of responsibility on developers of AI, and requires transparency, reporting, testing with third parties and tracking copyright. These are things that AI companies in the U.S. say they do already, Gadinis said.

“They all say that they do this to a certain extent,” he said. “But the question is, how expansive these efforts need to be, especially if you need to convince a regulator about it.”

AI companies in the U.S. currently self-govern, meaning they test their models for some of the societal and cybersecurity risks currently outlined by many lawmakers. But there’s no universal standard — what one company deems safe may be seen as risky to another, Gadinis said. Universal regulations would create a baseline for introducing new models and features, he said.

Even one company’s safety testing may look different from one year to the next. Until 2024, OpenAI’s CEO Sam Altman was pro-federal AI regulation, and sat on the company’s Safety and Security Committee, which regularly evaluates OpenAI’s processes and safeguards over a 90-day period.

In September, he left the committee, and has since become vocal against federal AI legislation. OpenAI’s safety committee has since been operating as an independent entity, Time reported. The committee recently published recommendations to enhance security measures, be more transparent about OpenAI’s work and “unify the company’s safety frameworks.”

Even though Altman has changed his tune on federal regulation, the mission of OpenAI is focused on the benefits society gains from AI — “They wanted to create [artificial general intelligence] that would benefit humanity instead of destroying it,” Salib said.

AI company Anthropic, maker of chatbot Claude, was formed by former staff members of OpenAI in 2021, and focuses on responsible AI development. Google, Microsoft and Meta are other top American AI companies that have some form of self safety testing, and were recently assessed by the AI Safety Project.

The project asked experts to weigh in on the strategies each company took for risk assessment, current harms, safety frameworks, existential safety strategy, governance and accountability, and transparency and communication. Anthropic scored the highest, but all companies were lacking in their “existential safety,” or the harm AI models could cause to society if unchanged.

Just by developing these internal policies, most AI leaders are acknowledging the need for some form of safeguards, Salib said.

“I don’t want to say there’s wide industry agreement, because some seem to have changed their tunes last summer,” Salib said. “But there’s at least a lot of evidence that this is serious and worthwhile thinking about.”

What could the U.S. gain from EU’s practices?

Salib said he believes a law like the EU AI Act in the U.S. would be too “overly comprehensive.”

Many laws addressing AI concerns now, like discrimination by algorithms or self-driving cars, could be governed by existing laws — “It’s not clear to me that we need special AI laws for these things.”

But he said that the specific, case-by-case legislation that the states have been passing have been effective in targeting harmful AI actions, and ensuring compliance from AI companies.

Gadinis said he’s not sure why Congress is opposed to the state-by-state legislative model, as most of the state laws are consumer oriented, and very specific — like deciding how a state may use AI in education, preventing discrimination in healthcare data or keeping children away from sexually explicit AI content.

“I wouldn’t consider these particularly controversial, right?” Gadinis said. “I don’t think the big AI companies would actually want to be associated with problems in that area.”

Gadinis said the EU’s AI Act originally mirrored this specific, case-by-case approach, addressing AI considerations around sexual images, minors, consumer fraud and use of consumer data. But when ChatGPT was released in 2022, EU lawmakers went back to the drawing board and added the component about large language models, systematic risk, high-risk strategies and training, which made the reach of who needed to comply much wider.

After 10 months living with the law, the European Commission said this month it is open to “simplify the implementation” to make it easier for companies to comply.

It’s unlikely the U.S. will end up with AI regulations as comprehensive as the EU, Gadinis and Salib said. President Trump’s administration has taken a deregulated approach to tech so far, and Republicans passed a 10-year moratorium on state-level AI laws in the “big, beautiful bill” heading to the Senate consideration.

Gadinis predicts that the federal government won’t take much action at all to regulate AI, but mounting pressure from the public may result in an industry self-regulatory body. This is where he believes the EU will be most influential — they have leaned on public-private partnerships to develop a strategy.

“Most of the action is going to come either from the private sector itself — they will band together — or from what the EU is doing in getting experts together, trying to kind of come up with a sort of half industry, half government approach,” Gadinis said.

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

The post European Union AI regulation is both model and warning for U.S. lawmakers, experts say appeared first on virginiamercury.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: Centrist

This article presents a balanced overview of the debate around AI regulation, offering perspectives from multiple stakeholders including European regulators, U.S. lawmakers from both parties, industry experts, and academics. It neither champions unregulated innovation nor uncritically endorses strict regulation, instead highlighting the complexity of the issue. The piece fairly represents concerns about overregulation potentially hindering innovation as well as arguments supporting consumer protections. The inclusion of bipartisan viewpoints and nuanced discussion without ideological framing indicates neutral, factual reporting rather than a partisan stance.

Up Next

Severe storm threat today

Don't Miss

First Alert Forecast: Friday’s strong late-day storms

News from the South - Virginia News Feed

Heat Advisory: Feels-like temps topping 105° this weekend

Published

3 days ago

July 26, 2025

Staff Editor

www.youtube.com – WTVR CBS 6 – 2025-07-26 07:30:47

SUMMARY: A heat advisory is in effect through 8:00 p.m. tomorrow, with feels-like temperatures topping 105° in the hottest afternoons. Highs will range from upper 80s to around 90 near the coast, rising to mid to upper 90s inland, especially farther south and west. Northeasterly to easterly winds may slightly reduce temperatures today. Overnight lows will be in the 70s. Scattered pop-up thunderstorms may occur this afternoon and tomorrow, with a better chance of storms late tomorrow. Mid to upper 90s will persist through midweek, with cooler weather and a strong cold front expected Friday to lower heat and humidity.

WEATHER ALERT: A heat advisory is in effect until 8 p.m. Sunday. The heat index will break 105° in the afternoons.

Source

News from the South - Virginia News Feed

New push to solve 50-year-old killing of 15-year-old girl | NBC4 Washington

Published

3 days ago

July 25, 2025

Staff Editor

www.youtube.com – NBC4 Washington – 2025-07-25 20:34:54

SUMMARY: Fifty years ago, 15-year-old Cathy Beatty was found unconscious, sexually assaulted, and later died near Parkland Middle School in Aspen Hill. Last seen in 1975, her case remains unsolved despite decades of investigation by Montgomery County police. Cathy, a fun-loving teen, was found barefoot with a purse containing unknown car keys and a missing wallet discovered later in the wooded area. She was struck with a blunt object and sexually assaulted. Detective Lisa Bromley, nearing retirement, hopes new DNA tests and genetic genealogy advances will finally solve the case. Police encourage anyone with information to come forward to bring justice to Cathy.

Investigators remain hopeful they’ll find the person who killed a 15-year-old girl in 1975. News4’s Paul Wagner reports.
_______

NBC4 Washington / WRC-TV is the No. 1 broadcast television station and the home of the most-watched local news in Washington, D.C. The station leads the market in providing timely and breaking news and information in text, video and graphics across more than 15 platforms including NBCWashington.com, the NBC4 app, NBC4 streaming news channel, newsletters, and social media.

FOLLOW & STREAM NBC4 WASHINGTON

NBC4 News Streaming channel: https://www.nbcwashington.com/watch/
Xumo Play: https://play.xumo.com/live-guide/nbc-washington-dc-news
Roku: https://therokuchannel.roku.com/watch/021707311e0b595597f97a389e0051e6/nbc-washington-dc-news
Also available on Pluto TV, Freevee, Google TV, TCL, Local Now, and Samsung TV Plus.

More here: https://www.nbcwashington.com/watchlive/
Instagram: http://nbc4dc.com/3HxYkYH
Threads: http://nbc4dc.com/ZYZAAHJ
Facebook: http://nbc4dc.com/iD1GvRQ
X: http://nbc4dc.com/APF7vQM
TikTok: http://nbc4dc.com/pg5Nx67
VISIT OUR SITE: https://www.nbcwashington.com/
DOWNLOAD OUR FREE APPS: https://www.nbcwashington.com/products/
WATCH NBC4 LIVE ON AMAZON FIRE TV: https://www.nbcwashington.com/firetv/
WATCH NBC4 LIVE ON ROKU: https://www.nbcwashington.com/roku/d

Source

News from the South - Virginia News Feed

Democrats, Wilder defend Va.’s top-ranked higher education system amid Trump investigations

Published

4 days ago

July 25, 2025

Staff Editor

virginiamercury.com – Nathaniel Cline – 2025-07-25 04:25:00

by Nathaniel Cline, Virginia Mercury
July 25, 2025

In a display of unity, former Democratic Gov. L. Douglas Wilder joined several Democratic leaders in Richmond on Thursday to oppose what they say are partisan attacks on Virginia’s education system and universities.

The event came on the heels of a group of George Mason University professors’ vote of no confidence in the school’s governing board amid a federal civil rights investigation, and weeks after the University of Virginia’s president resigned following federal pressure to dismantle diversity, equity and inclusion efforts at the school.

Democrats also announced they’re considering conducting an in-depth review of how the governor appoints members to governing boards including at Virginia’s colleges and universities, and reforming the process. The current process has come under intense scrutiny after Senate legislators rejected eight of Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s appointees to college boards, and launched a lawsuit against the administration over the issue.

“What we’re seeing today is not about policy differences. It’s about a pattern, a coordinated effort to silence, punish and erase,” said Wilder.

Wilder joined several House and Senate Democrats, who highlighted the academic successes of Virginia’s higher educational institutions, after President Donald Trump’s administration launched several investigations into Virginia’s universities, primarily the University of Virginia and George Mason University.

CNBC ranked Virginia’s education system as the top system in the country for the second year in a row, despite the commonwealth dropping three spots to fourth overall as the best state to do business.

Within the past month, the Trump administration launched a fourth investigation at George Mason University, targeting the institution’s DEI initiatives, employees’ employment practices, and treatment of students. The list of investigations also included a separate query into alleged antisemitism on campus.

House Democratic Leader Charniele Herring, D-Alexandria, a graduate of George Mason, defended her alma mater and other institutions in the commonwealth.

“We believe in facts, we believe in freedom and we believe in the future of our students,” Herring said. “This generation of students deserves better than to be caught in the crosshairs of a partisan law affair. They deserve investment, not interference. They deserve opportunity, not obstruction, and they deserve degrees, not delusions.”

At UVA, former president Jim Ryan stepped down after the U.S. Department of Justice, under the direction of the Trump administration, put pressure on the institution following Title VI complaints and political scrutiny.

The U.S. Department of Justice also claimed that the institution failed to fully dismantle its DEI programs and merely rebranded its efforts.

In a statement from the governor’s office following the press briefing, Youngkin spokesman Peter Finocchio said that “there is no place for antisemitism” or “racial preferences driving admission or hiring decisions” in the commonwealth following the press briefing.

“We must follow the law as established by the Supreme Court and federal laws, including civil rights statutes,” Finocchio said. “Virginia’s world-class system of higher education will continue to be defined by our ability to graduate outstanding students who are fully prepared to succeed in the workforce.”

DEI: The lightning rod

DEI initiatives are a lynchpin in the divide between Democrats and Republicans, and though their divergence of views on DEI originate before the start of the first Trump administration, the conflict has escalated during the president’s second term.

DEI efforts date back to the post-Civil War Reconstruction era, when the Freedmen’s Bureau was established to assist formerly enslaved Black Americans and give them a fairer chance at educational, financial and social success in American society. More recent, high-profile examples of racial injustice and unequal opportunity for people of color — such as the murder of Black Minnesota man George Floyd at the hands of a white police officer, and Supreme Court’s recission of affirmative action policies on college campuses in 2023 — resulted in public demand for corporate and institutional commitments to treating all Americans fairly.

“Diversity, equity and inclusion are not threats. They are tools of fairness,” Wilder said. “They’re grounded in the constitutional values that shape this country and its commonwealth. What threatens us, what really threatens us, is unchecked power.”

However, Republicans argue that DEI initiatives present cultural, ideological and political problems. Chief among the concerns is the threat of placing a person’s identity over achievements when determining their qualifications, and “reverse discrimination,” which they say puts the majority at a disadvantage.

UVA’s governing board was the first in the commonwealth to dissolve its DEI initiatives, but it was not enough to avoid involvement from the Trump administration.

Youngkin’s administration has also confronted DEI efforts by renaming the state Office of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion through an executive order — replacing “equity” with “opportunity,” contrary to state code — and eliminating DEI-driven education programs at the Virginia Department of Education through an executive order designed to remove “divisive concepts” in school curriculum.

Independence vs accountability

Through their actions this year, Senate Democrats have tried to enforce the principles governing board members must follow, including understanding fiduciary duties, commitment to independent institutional governance, and a pledge to avoid excessive partisan inclinations.

This manifested on June 9, when the Senate Privileges and Elections Committee rejected several of Youngkin’s appointments to governing boards. Youngkin’s administration has challenged these, claiming that appointments can still serve until the entire General Assembly reconvenes.

The contention set the state for a lawsuit and court hearing on Friday to decide whether leaders at Virginia Military Institute, the University of Virginia, and George Mason University broke the rules by allowing rejected appointees to remain on their governing boards.

The Rotunda at the University of Virginia. (Photo by Sarah Vogelsong/Virginia Mercury)

The legislators are asking the court to bar the contested board members from continuing to serve and declare that any board member who permits them to remain is violating their legal duties. Among the rejected appointments were GOP stalwarts, including former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, a former deputy secretary of Homeland Security with the first Trump administration, and former state commerce and trade secretary Caren Merrick.

On July 10, Senate Democratic leaders asked the Senate to sign a letter supporting Virginia’s higher education institutions and institutional independence. In response, Republicans refuted the letter’s intention.

“Today’s press conference was silent on the real issue: a formal federal Title VI investigation into George Mason’s handling of race-based complaints, including nearly forty reports tied to antisemitic harassment last fall,” said House Minority Leader Terry Kilgore, R-Scott, in a statement to the Mercury. “This isn’t politics. It’s civil rights law asking: Were complaints processed, investigated, supported, or ignored? Fighting antisemitism isn’t a pretext. Oversight isn’t partisan. It’s accountability.”

In a July 11 statement, Senate Republican leaders also addressed the matter, expressing concern that Democrats are attempting to shield higher education institutions from any form of public accountability while simultaneously politicizing board appointments and weaponizing the courts against college leaders.

Republicans also emphasized that while academic freedom is a “core value,” state government oversight and accountability are not only appropriate but essential.

“We strongly support academic excellence and freedom of inquiry,” Senate Republican Caucus Chairman Mark Obenshain, R-Harrisonburg, said in a statement. “But there’s nothing improper about ensuring that our public universities reflect the values and priorities of the people of Virginia. That’s not interference—that’s representative government.”

“Our institutions deserve better than this performative double standard,” Senate Minority Leader Ryan McDougle, R-Hanover, said. “Virginia’s students and families are watching—and they know the difference between real leadership and political theater.”

The path forward

Democratic leaders acknowledged that while they cannot control the federal government’s actions, they do have some options for the challenges facing Virginia’s higher education landscape, including reconsidering legislation to support governing boards that could help address the gubernatorial appointment process.

House Speaker Don Scott speaking to reporters on July 24. (Photo by Nathaniel Cline/Virginia Mercury)

One idea is for the legislature to reconsider a proposal from last year’s session that Youngkin vetoed. The proposal would have redefined the authority of governing boards within public universities regarding their legal affairs. The proposal would have allowed the boards to manage independent legal counsel. It also clarified that the state attorney general’s involvement in legal matters would be limited to instances where their services are specifically requested.

Senate Majority Leader Scott Surovell, D-Fairfax, said since Youngkin took office the administration’s plan has been to reform institutions and remake governing boards to align them with conservative ideals, pointing to Attorney General Jason Miyares firing the attorneys at UVA and George Mason.

“There’s been a deliberate coordinated effort to get this done at the very beginning,” Surovell said.

Lawmakers are also considering amendments to the state code that specifies gubernatorial appointments cannot take effect until they are confirmed by the General Assembly, typically in January.

Speaker Don Scott, D-Portsmouth, said he is pondering proposing a study and forming a select joint committee to better understand the history of the governing boards.

“We have a responsibility, I think, as we move forward, to put in some guardrails,” Scott said. “I think to do that we need the public support (and) we need to let them know what’s happening now, so when we do make these changes, they’ll understand why we had to do it.”

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

The post Democrats, Wilder defend Va.’s top-ranked higher education system amid Trump investigations appeared first on virginiamercury.com

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

This content presents a perspective that largely supports Democratic viewpoints, emphasizing opposition to Republican-led investigations and actions against diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in Virginia’s higher education system. It highlights Democratic leaders criticizing the GOP and former Trump administration for politicizing academic institutions and portrays DEI efforts as rooted in fairness and constitutional values. While it includes some Republican responses, these are framed in opposition to the Democratic position, with the overall tone favoring Democratic critiques and policy proposals. Thus, the bias leans moderately left of center without veering into far-left rhetoric.