News from the South - West Virginia News Feed

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

Published

1 month ago

May 19, 2025

Staff Editor

westvirginiawatch.com – Paige Gross – 2025-05-19 05:00:00

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.

Up Next

Christian’s Morning Forecast: Nice Start Before Another Rainy Week

Don't Miss

Charleston welcomes cycling fans with music, food, and excitement at road championships

News from the South - West Virginia News Feed

Jay’s Evening Weather for Friday 06/20/25

Published

3 hours ago

June 21, 2025

Staff Editor

www.youtube.com – WOAY TV – 2025-06-20 17:55:25

SUMMARY: Hot weather is building this weekend through early next week across the eastern U.S., especially affecting lower-elevation areas like Charleston, Huntington, and parts of southwestern West Virginia. Extreme heat watches are in effect Sunday through Wednesday for McDowell and Wyoming counties, with heat index values possibly exceeding 100°. Currently, conditions are pleasant with temperatures in the mid to upper 70s, and mostly dry skies expected through Monday. Weekend events include an antique car show in Beckley and a Renaissance Fair in Lewisburg. Showers and storms are forecast to return late Thursday into Friday. Summer solstice sunset is at 8:50 p.m.

It is a pleasant end to the traditional work week, but warm weather takes us through the weekend, and it turns downright hot as we go through next week.

FOR ALL THE LATEST, FOLLOW US ON FACEBOOK AND TWITTER:
https://facebook.com/WOAYNewsWatch
https://twitter.com/WOAYNewsWatch

Source

News from the South - West Virginia News Feed

City of Dunbar settles police brutality lawsuit totaling $500K

Published

1 day ago

June 20, 2025

Staff Editor

www.youtube.com – WCHS Eyewitness News – 2025-06-20 14:00:43

SUMMARY: Dunbar city officials have agreed to a \$500,000 settlement in a police brutality lawsuit filed by Anthony Reese, who accused officers of using excessive force against him in 2023 near the police station. This follows a prior \$2 million settlement in the death of Michael Scott Jr., with Officer Zachary Winters involved in both cases. Despite no admission of wrongdoing, total settlements now exceed \$3 million, and another excessive force lawsuit is pending. Winters invoked his Fifth Amendment rights during deposition. The city has a new police chief and claims improvement, but concerns about recurring misconduct remain among residents.

As the city of Dunbar agrees to settle another police brutality lawsuit, this time for half a million dollars, city officials maintain officers did nothing wrong. Others claim Dunbar’s police department exhibit a pattern of civil rights violations.

FULL STORY: https://wchstv.com/news/local/city-of-dunbar-settles-another-police-brutality-lawsuit-totaling-500000#
_________________________________________

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

News from the South - West Virginia News Feed

‘What did it threaten?’ WVU board removes faculty, student voting rights due to new GOP law

Published

1 day ago

June 20, 2025

Staff Editor

westvirginiawatch.com – Amelia Ferrell Knisely – 2025-06-20 05:00:00

by Amelia Ferrell Knisely, West Virginia Watch
June 20, 2025

West Virginia University’s Board of Governors formally removed voting rights from faculty, staff and student representatives on the board, carrying out a Republican-backed bill that mandated the change.

“The board must amend its bylaws to reflect the new legislative requirements,” Board of Governors Vice-Chair Dr. Patrice Harris said at board meeting June 13 in Morgantown.

Colin Street

Incoming WVU Student Body President Colin Street, whose voting power on the board is now void, said student input should be considered on a board that last year voted to cut 28 majors during a financial crunch.

“Student input needs to be heard at every step in every decision,” said Street, 20. “I think it’s really concerning that the vote is taken away.”

House Bill 3279 made several changes to boards at state universities, including a requirement that one member be appointed by the governor to represent agriculture or forestry at WVU and West Virginia State University. It gives the governor the authority to appoint 15 members instead of 12 at WVU.

In support of removing the faculty, staff and student board vote, Sen. Patricia Rucker, R-Jefferson, said in April that only two Big 12 university boards have voting faculty members, six have voting student members and none have voting staff.

Gov. Patrick Morrisey signed the legislation into law in April.

WVU’s Board of Governors have now amended their by-laws to reflect the legislation’s requirements.

Ahead of the vote, faculty members raised concerns about removing their voices along with questions about the origin of the bill in the House of Delegates.

“Why was this done? Why did it threaten or what did it threaten?” asked Lesley Cottrell, a professor at WVU who serves as the BOG representative. “I would argue this was a short-sighted strategy because, while faculty, students and staff may disagree with some board members today, they may be the fiercest proponents of your ideas tomorrow. … Trying to strip them of their voice by limiting voting rights or consolidating power only weakens that engine. It’s an old tactic because it works very well.”

The bill was sponsored by Del. Vernon Criss, R-Wood, chairman of the House Finance Committee. During bill debate in April, Senate Minority Leader Mike Woelfel, D-Cabell, also questioned the motive behind the legislation, saying that the origin of the bill was tied to House Speaker Roger Hanshaw’s unsuccessful attempt to be the next WVU president.

University president E. Gordon Gee will retire this summer. Michael T. Benson, current president of Coastal Carolina University, will replace him. WVU’s BOG voted to approve Gee’s successor.

Hanshaw didn’t provide a response for this story. He didn’t respond to Woelfel’s comments during the legislative session.

“ … [Hanshaw] voted in favor of it both times it came in front of the full House for a vote, so that would indicate his belief that it would benefit the boards of governors at both WVU and WVSU,” Ann Ali, communicators director for the House, said in an email.

Frankie Tack, outgoing faculty representative on the BOG, said the legislation “is now history.”

“I do remain curious as to who the original author was and who delivered the bill initially to Speaker Hanshaw. I certainly hope the rumor is not true that it was one of the people around this table,” she said at the board meeting, referring to recent discord among board members tied to the university president search.

“Prior to the stripping of our voting rights, faculty had served as voting members of the West Virginia [University] Board of Trustees and subsequently the West Virginia University Board of Governors since 1989, and despite recent assertions to the contrary, we have served honorably with loyalty, without conflicts of interest, and without complaints from anyone, ever, including no record or complaint of any faculty member ever breaking the confidentiality of the board,” Tack said.

Street said that while university officials have continued listening to students, it was disappointing that he wouldn’t have a chance to represent students through voting power on the Board of Governors.

“I ran for this position in the first place to be that advocate for students,” he said. “So it was less a personal disappointment and more a disappointment that … my ability to effectively do my job and represent students is going to be hampered or more challenging in some way.”

The Board of Governors also voted 9-6 to select Robert “Rusty” Hutson Jr. as the body’s next chairman, effective July 1. Hutson is chief executive of Diversified Energy.

YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE.

SUPPORT

The post ‘What did it threaten?’ WVU board removes faculty, student voting rights due to new GOP law appeared first on westvirginiawatch.com

Political Bias Rating: Center-Left

The article presents a critical perspective on a Republican-backed legislative change that removes voting rights from faculty, staff, and student representatives on the West Virginia University Board of Governors. It highlights concerns and skepticism from faculty and student representatives about the removal of their voices, framing the legislation as a consolidation of power aligned with GOP interests. The inclusion of quotes that question the bill’s origin and raise issues about transparency, along with a focus on the negative implications for campus representation, suggests a lean toward a more progressive or center-left viewpoint, emphasizing the value of inclusive governance and accountability. However, it still provides factual information about the bill’s supporters and legislative context in a mostly balanced manner without overt editorializing.