It is not often that the attorneys general from Washington and Idaho agree to oppose actions by the Trump administration. But such is the case regarding the president’s initiatives surrounding the regulation of artificial intelligence (AI).
In the past week, President Donald Trump signed an executive order designed to boost development of AI projects. “The Genesis Mission will dramatically accelerate scientific discovery, strengthen national security, secure energy dominance, enhance workforce productivity, and multiply the return on taxpayer investment into research and development,” the order states.
Trump also has urged legislation that would block states from passing measures to regulate AI, seeking to include such a provision in a military spending bill.
As politics often does, the administration’s recent interest in artificial intelligence has created strange bedfellows. Last week, a bipartisan group of 36 state attorneys general — including Washington Democrat Nick Brown and Idaho Republican Raul Labrador — signed a letter to congressional leaders opposing a federal moratorium on such regulations.
“If Congress is serious about grappling with how AI’s emergence creates opportunities and challenges for our safety and well-being, then the states look forward to working with you on a substantive effort,” the letter states. “AI will cause tidal waves in our public safety, national security, economy, and health, and the United States needs to be ready to be an international leader.”
Congress has been slow to broach broad regulation of emerging artificial intelligence technology. The One Big Beautiful Bill Act passed this summer initially included a provision to prevent states from regulating AI; that provision was removed through an amendment introduced by Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash.
Meanwhile, states have passed a patchwork of laws regarding artificial intelligence. In Washington, that includes the establishment of an AI task force to examine the impact and potential benefits of the technology.
Differing laws across 50 states is neither productive nor efficient. But with Congress reluctant to forge a consensus, it is necessary for states to take the lead; the alternative — an unregulated landscape — is unsafe. As the Associated Press reports, “Critics from both political parties — as well as civil liberties and consumer rights groups — worry that banning state regulation would amount to a favor for big AI companies who enjoy little to no oversight.”
Labrador said, “I will never support the federal government telling a state what it can and cannot do to protect our citizens within the framework of the Constitution. We have seen that artificial intelligence can be dangerously abused and exploited. States like Idaho shouldn’t be blocked from doing what we see as right and necessary.”
The issue has driven a rare wedge between Trump and his supporters. Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said, “I don’t think we are doing enough to protect workers. We need to do more because I’m confident Silicon Valley will get rich from this … but what about blue-collar workers in my state?”
There also are concerns about what Trump’s unlimited support of AI — and the data centers required to run it — will do to energy costs throughout the country.
All of this adds up to a frontier that requires thoughtful regulation and governments that are empowered to tap the brakes. Congress should heed the warnings and allow states to act in the best interests of their residents when it comes to artificial intelligence.
