Connect with us

News from the South - West Virginia News Feed

McCuskey didn’t join 40 AGs fighting a proposed federal ban on states crafting their own AI laws

Published

on

westvirginiawatch.com – Amelia Ferrell Knisely – 2025-05-27 05:00:00


West Virginia Attorney General J.B. McCuskey did not join 40 other state attorneys general in opposing a federal measure that would block states from regulating artificial intelligence (AI) for 10 years. The measure, part of a GOP tax bill, aims to create unified federal AI guidelines amid rapid legislative developments nationwide. While West Virginia recently passed a law making AI-generated child pornography a felony, Senator Ryan Weld believes it would not be overturned by the federal ban. The National Association of Attorneys General and the National Conference of State Legislatures oppose the moratorium, arguing it undermines states’ authority to address AI’s evolving risks.

McCuskey didn’t join 40 AGs fighting a proposed federal ban on states crafting their own AI laws

by Amelia Ferrell Knisely, West Virginia Watch
May 27, 2025

Attorney General J.B. McCuskey didn’t join 40 other state attorneys general calling on Congress to reject what they call an “irresponsible” federal measure that would block states from setting their own regulations on the use of artificial intelligence for the next 10 years.

Right now, states have the authority to set their own AI rules. The West Virginia Legislature recently passed a bill prohibiting the creation, distribution or possession of AI-generated child pornography.

A letter from the National Association of Attorneys General issued earlier this month said the “broad” AI moratorium measure, which is tucked into President Donald Trump’s tax cut bill, would be “sweeping and wholly destructive of reasonable state efforts to prevent known harms associated with AI.” 

McCuskey’s office didn’t respond to questions about why he didn’t sign onto the letter, which included Republicans from Ohio, Tennessee and Virginia. 

“This bill does not propose any regulatory scheme to replace or supplement the laws enacted or currently under consideration by the states, leaving Americans entirely unprotected from the potential harms of AI,” the letter read. “Moreover, this bill purports to wipe away any state-level frameworks already in place. Imposing a broad moratorium on all state action while Congress fails to act in this area is irresponsible and deprives consumers of reasonable protections.”

According to an analysis by the National Conference of State Legislatures, 26 states adopted or enacted at least 75 new AI measures. Some of those measures have sought to ban the creation of deepfakes for political campaigns or ban the use of AI to send spam calls or texts. 

Republicans in Washington behind the proposed state-level ban say there’s an urgent need to pass a unified, federal set of guidelines after more than 1,000 pieces of legislation relating to AI have been introduced just this year. A 10-year moratorium on state’s enacting AI laws could give Congress the time to pass those guidelines, they say, and the language banning states from setting their own AI regulations was rolled into the 1,100 page controversial budget bill

Sen. Ryan Weld, R-Brooke

Congress would prohibit enforcement of any existing laws on AI and decision-making systems. But Sen. Ryan Weld, R-Brooke, doesn’t think that West Virginia’s new law banning the use of AI in child pornography would be struck down should the federal measure pass because of how it’s written. 

The measure, Senate Bill 198, made it a felony offense in West Virginia to use or entice a minor to assist in creating computer-generated images for child pornography or create a visual portrayal of a minor engaging in any sexually explicit conduct. It also bans the distribution of AI-generated child pornography. Weld, an attorney, said it addressed a loophole in the state’s current laws prohibiting child pornography as AI is a growing industry. 

“The federal provisions would allow for SB 198 to go into effect because it doesn’t affect laws of general applicability …  because [the bill] affects AI, but also it doesn’t discriminate between using artificial intelligence to manipulate an image or create a visual portrayal of a minor … using Adobe Photoshop or something like that,” he explained.

Weld said he was “reluctant” about states potentially losing their ability to regulate AI.

“I don’t like to see states being able to legislate on their own in areas that they generally have the authority to,” he said. “States are the laboratories of democracy for a reason.”

There are limited AI laws in West Virginia, but lawmakers have begun introducing legislation on the topic and exploring how it might work in government. In 2023, the Legislature passed a bill that launched a pilot program to explore how AI could be used to assess road quality and predict maintenance projects. 

Last year the House of Delegates created the AI Select Committee that advanced four AI-related bills. Three of those measures died in the Senate, and one resolution, which created an AI Task Force, passed the full Legislature. The AI Task Force was asked to determine the state agency or agencies that would develop AI policies, consider public interest use cases for AI and more. The task force is supposed to submit a report by July. 

The National Conference of State Legislatures also opposes the proposed moratorium on states’ ability to regulate AI, saying in a letter to U.S. House members that it “is an infringement on states’ authority to effectively legislate in this rapidly evolving and consequential policy domain, and in our view, is a violation of the Byrd Rule.” The rule — named for late Democratic Senator Robert C. Byrd — governs the budget reconciliation process and provisions deemed “extraneous” are prohibited. 

The AI law moratorium measure was packaged with $500 million to modernize federal IT programs with commercial AI systems through 2035.

The U.S. House narrowly approved the GOP-backed massive tax and spending bill with the AI measure on Thursday. Both West Virginia Reps. Riley Moore and Carol Miller, R-W.Va., voted in support of the bill, and it now heads to the U.S. Senate.

In Washington D.C., a House subcommittee earlier this week took its first major step in discussing widespread regulations for AI legislation at the federal level. 

Support for federal guidelines or regulation around AI technologies received bipartisan support in the last Congress, States Newsroom reports

On May 22, McCuskey sent a letter on behalf of 15 attorneys general to the Department of Energy and Federal Energy Regulatory Commission outlining the need “for federal officials to establish a Strategic Electricity Reserve to protect our nation’s energy grid.” It would be used in cases of power shortages or emergencies.

In a news release, McCuskey said, “the reserve will provide a layer of security that is needed now more than ever.”

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

SUPPORT

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 McCuskey didn’t join 40 AGs fighting a proposed federal ban on states crafting their own AI laws 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 article presents facts about West Virginia Attorney General J.B. McCuskey’s decision not to join other attorneys general in opposing a federal AI moratorium bill. The coverage highlights Republican viewpoints and concerns about state regulatory authority, emphasizing conservative values of state sovereignty and skepticism about federal overreach. It also presents bipartisan context on AI regulation and notes GOP support for a large tax and spending bill containing the AI provisions. The tone remains mostly factual but the focus on GOP legislators and framing of state authority leans moderately toward a center-right perspective.

News from the South - West Virginia News Feed

WV governor pledges transparency, accountability in state's child welfare system

Published

on

www.youtube.com – WCHS Eyewitness News – 2025-05-29 11:00:50

SUMMARY: West Virginia Governor Patrick Morrisey pledged to improve transparency, accountability, and outcomes in the state’s child welfare system, addressing long-standing issues highlighted by tragic cases like the death of 14-year-old Kennedy Miller and abuse in Sissonville. The administration plans to be open about system problems and eliminate barriers faced by Child Protective Services (CPS) workers. Following statewide listening sessions with families and caseworkers, reforms include a revamped child welfare dashboard, new transparency policies, increased supervisor training, and thorough reviews of incidents. Morrisey emphasized honesty and accountability, committing to ongoing improvements for a safer child welfare system.

YouTube video

West Virginia Gov. Patrick Morrisey pledged on Wednesday to improve transparency, accountability and outcomes in the state’s childcare welfare system.

FULL STORY: https://wchstv.com/news/local/governor-morrisey-to-revamp-child-welfare-system-focus-on-transparency-accountability#

_________________________________________

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

Continue Reading

News from the South - West Virginia News Feed

‘How we ended up here’: Authors on effects of abortion bans

Published

on

westvirginiawatch.com – Sofia Resnick – 2025-05-29 05:00:00


Amanda Becker and Colleen Long presented their 2024 books on reproductive rights at the 2025 Gaithersburg Book Festival. Becker’s *You Must Stand Up* explores the first year after Roe v. Wade was overturned, focusing on abortion providers and activists. Long, with Rebecca Little, authored *I’m Sorry for My Loss*, examining pregnancy loss and how post-Dobbs abortion restrictions worsen medical care, especially for marginalized groups. Both books address the intertwining of abortion rights with pregnancy loss, the cultural silence around miscarriage, and the political and medical impacts of abortion bans. They emphasize the growing challenges in reproductive healthcare and the need for continued advocacy.

by Sofia Resnick, West Virginia Watch
May 29, 2025

During the pandemic, when many people were reevaluating their life goals, Colleen Long texted her childhood best friend and fellow journalist Rebecca Little to see if, together, they could write a relatable, even funny, book about pregnancy loss.

“My friend Rebecca … she likes to say she kind of had the pu pu platter of loss,” Long said during an author panel at the 2025 Gaithersburg Book Festival in Gaithersburg, Maryland, on May 17. “She had all sorts of terrible things happen: a stillbirth; she had to end the pregnancy of twins; she had several miscarriages. And I had a stillbirth.”

They wanted to understand why it was so hard to talk about pregnancy loss in public, and thus difficult to process.

“She and I started talking about how what we would really like to do is to write a book about why we are so bad at talking about pregnancy loss,” said Long, a senior editor at NBC News. “What is it about our culture that makes it impossible to sort of discuss this, and yet, when it happens to you, then all of these people come out of the woodwork and talk about it. We’re saying it’s like ‘Fight Club,’ but maybe we should be taking fewer cues, you know, from Brad Pitt.”

Long and Little ended up speaking to about 100 people who experienced some form of pregnancy loss and continue to hear from people with experiences since their book, “I’m Sorry for My Loss: An Urgent Examination of Reproductive Care in America,” came out last year. Their book is also about how the U.S. Supreme Court’s reversal of federal abortion rights in June 2022, with the Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization decision, has exacerbated the consequences when pregnancy doesn’t go the way it’s supposed to. In the book, Little and Long document how pregnant and miscarrying women have been denied standard medical treatments because of state abortion bans, and how many people — disproportionately people of color — have been criminalized for decisions made while pregnant, long before Dobbs.

“In some ways, reproduction in America has been stripped back to basics, but we don’t find ourselves suddenly reliving a colonial life,” they write. “We would argue it’s more perverse in some ways because the advances in medicine are available, but they’re being withheld. Like the Back to the Future timeline where Biff Tannen runs a dystopian Hill Valley, we’re going back to a place we never really were.”

Subscribe to Reproductive Rights Today

Want a better understanding of abortion policy in the states? Sign up for our free national newsletter. Reproductive Rights Today is a comprehensive daily wrap-up of changes to reproductive rights in the states, the front lines in the fight over abortion access in a Post-Roe America.

Joining the panel was The 19th’s Amanda Becker, whose “You Must Stand Up: The Fight for Abortion Rights in Post-Dobbs America,” also published in 2024, tells the story of the first year after Roe v. Wade was overturned, from the perspective of abortion providers and reproductive rights activists.

“I truly think a lot of the people I feature in my book are heroes,” Becker said. “Being around them was just so incredibly inspiring, and how hard they’re working to help people and take care of people and preserve the ability to access care where people can still get it, and fighting to get it back where they can’t.”

States Newsroom reporter Sofia Resnick moderated the Q&A with the authors. The version below has been edited for brevity and clarity. The full conversation is scheduled to be broadcast on C-SPAN 2 Book TV on June 8.

States Newsroom: You both were working on these books before the Dobbs decision and you’ve been both covering major national stories. Why did you both decide to dedicate so much time to this particular story?

Colleen Long: When Roe fell, it really sort of informed our reporting in a different way, because a lot of the procedures that are used to treat pregnancy loss are used to treat abortion. So, our book was focused more on pregnancy loss. But really, our sort of principle for the book is, what has happened in the past 50 years — since Roe has been codified and now fallen — is that we sort of hold out everything that isn’t a perfect pregnancy or the end of an unwanted pregnancy. But there’s this vast middle ground that a lot of people tend to experience. … When Roe fell, everybody was like, “Oh, this is not going to affect miscarriage care. This could possibly not affect a woman who is wanting a pregnancy and is unable to continue her pregnancy.” And so what we’ve seen, obviously, since the fall of Roe, is that actually these things are all very much intertwined. So our idea was to better inform everyone.

Amanda Becker: My background is as a political reporter, not a health care reporter. So I was more interested in how reproductive rights, and abortion specifically, have really reordered our politics. It’s the biggest political story of my lifetime, and because I’m a person that was capable of giving birth, I also thought it was the most important story overall that affects more than half of this country directly. And I would argue that it affects everyone indirectly in some way.

I just knew it was going to be a very big year, and that’s why I decided to structure the book — it literally starts with the decision in June, and it ends the next June — because it was just such a sprawling story that I knew would affect every single state in a different way, and the residents in those states in different ways.

SN: What were the parts of your books that were hardest to write?

Long: Rebecca trained at [the famed Chicago improv theater] Second City, so she’s funny, she will be the first to tell you. We wanted to make this book readable … so we worked on the tone a lot. That said, the hardest part about writing this book was interviewing the people. We interviewed 100 different people, and they ran the gamut. Some experienced a miscarriage, some had a stillbirth, some had multiple stillbirths. Some had to end their pregnancies because of a host of reasons. We interviewed people from every religion, conservative people, liberal people, all kinds of different people, and it was hard. As a journalist, you are used to listening to people and hearing stories that are upsetting, but I think the thing that was most upsetting for us was how common a lot of their stories were in that they all felt, like, alone, unsure, didn’t know where to go.

Becker: I was trying to write a book that was ultimately hopeful. … I would say the most difficult points were just, like, the overwhelmingness of what was happening that year. And because my book is kind of looking at the loss of abortion rights as happening in tandem with the erosion of our democracy, which is something I care a lot about, it just would start to feel overwhelming sometimes. Like, how are we going to fix these things that have been happening over the last 100 years, you know? How can we get reproductive rights back unless we fix gerrymandering?

SN: In your respective historical research, what were some things that surprised you?

Becker: I was floored when I found out that the American Medical Association came into being to elevate male doctors over female midwives and then go on an anti-abortion crusade over the next 30 years that eventually changed the laws in almost every state in this country.

[Addressing Long:]And you get into this in your book, too: The father of gynecology did non-consensual experiments without anesthesia on enslaved women. And I’m learning this history of women’s healthcare and gynecological care and being like, this is how we ended up here.

Long: We have a long history in the beginning of our book — it’s literally called “How We Got Here” — to sort of explain how our attitudes have changed over the years on pregnancy and pregnancy loss. Because, for example, the way we view pregnancy — this was really surprising to me — the way we view pregnancy today is really only like 47 to 48 years old, and it has to do so much with modern medical advances, sonograms, the home pregnancy test. Our ideas about how we bond and the way we discuss pregnancy is just so different. 

SN: What have been some of the impacts of increased anti-abortion laws on health care and grief and loss?

Long: My OB-GYN came from Oklahoma [where abortion is banned] because she was, like, “I feel as though I can’t practice safely.” … And the other thing we’re noticing is that doctors — not OB-GYNs, but like any doctors — they’re considering where to go to medical school. And the states in which the abortion laws are very strict, they’re sort of looking away from those states because … they’re afraid of their own medical care. So I would expect us in — I don’t know, five years, maybe, let’s say six years — we’re going to start seeing like a real disparate situation in the United States, where we have some states with very good medical care, and other states, which, let’s face it, already had poor medical care, are going to have worse medical care.

Becker: You don’t find out about a lot of really bad fetal abnormalities until the 20- to 21-week anatomy scan, so [people] made really difficult decisions, and a lot of them that I’ve spoken to feel like they can’t even grieve that openly because of what’s in the public discourse right now about abortion and abortion bans. Yes, they had an abortion, but they’re grieving a pregnancy that they very much wanted and a child that they very much wanted, and I think it’s just making it more difficult for people to talk about.

Long: This is where politics is tricky. … We interviewed a lot of women who identified as politically left-leaning who felt they weren’t allowed to mourn their miscarriage because they didn’t want to be seen as a traitor to the cause of abortion rights, which is hard.

And then … you have what has happened with the restrictions and the fetal personhood laws. … This is a very new concept, to have the sort of baby and the mother have the same legal rights, and that’s what we’re seeing play out in some of these places. And it plays out in really strange ways. Because when you have a life or death situation and you have these two entities, one does not exist without the other. And like, who is worth saving more? It’s just a really complicated morass.

Becker: If you talk to experts, both legal and medical, in fetal personhood and what it means in practice, they will tell you that in a fetal personhood situation where you’re putting at odds the rights of a fetus versus the right of the gestational parent, the fetus always wins when we apply fetal personhood. And so we’re going to see more and more of that.

Audience Member: It seems to me that in the last political campaign, we started to hear a lot about the impact of these laws on women, and somehow that’s fallen out of the news. And so how do we mobilize around this issue?

Becker: I think we were hearing about it in part because it was an election season and a presidential election, and I would expect that to come back around for the midterms and the next time we have a lot of abortion ballot measures on ballots. … Politicians pay attention to what gets them elected or not elected. So if that’s a reason you’re going to elect someone or not elect them, let them know that. 

Long: I covered the [presidential] campaign, and like even during the campaign, I felt like these issues sort of only caught fire when they thought it could be a winning issue. And the Democrats are in a weird rebuilding phase right now, and so I think they’re trying to figure out what works and what doesn’t. … They were really hoping that reproductive rights and reproductive health was going to drive people to the polls, in particular women, and in the end, they lost. … And the conversation is no longer happening. But if you think about it, the conversation was never happening. It only just started happening, and then it was a blip. And then now we’re sort of back to where we were, which is super annoying. 

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 ‘How we ended up here’: Authors on effects of abortion bans 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-Left

This content centers around reproductive rights, highlighting the challenges faced after the Dobbs decision that reversed federal abortion protections. It emphasizes stories of miscarriage and pregnancy loss while linking the legal and medical consequences of anti-abortion laws with broader issues of healthcare access and social justice. The views expressed show sympathy for reproductive rights advocates and critique policies that restrict abortion access, aligning the narrative with a progressive, reproductive rights supportive stance typically found in center-left discourse. However, the tone remains largely factual and focused on personal narratives and policy impacts, without overtly radical language or strong partisan attacks, reflecting a center-left lean rather than far-left.

Continue Reading

News from the South - West Virginia News Feed

RFK Jr. announces changes in COVID vaccine recommendations

Published

on

www.youtube.com – WSAZ NewsChannel 3 – 2025-05-28 22:58:52

SUMMARY: US Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. announced that COVID-19 vaccines will no longer be recommended for healthy children and pregnant women, removing them from the CDC immunization schedule. This decision, made on social media, bypassed the usual expert vetting process. Dr. Matthew Christensen, Valley Health Chief Medical Officer, expressed concern about the unclear criteria for “healthy” and the lack of traditional review. He noted insurance coverage for vaccines might change, though the science supporting vaccination remains strong. Medical societies continue to recommend COVID vaccines for protection, especially for vulnerable populations, emphasizing evidence-based decisions in healthcare.

YouTube video

RFK Jr. announces changes in COVID vaccine recommendations For more Local News from WSAZ: https://www.wsaz.com/ For …

Source

Continue Reading

Trending