Latest Developments in Efforts by State Attorneys General to Preserve Local Authority on AI Regulation
By: Christopher Carusone & Michael Carusone
Introduction
Since the widespread release of artificial intelligence (AI) to the public, the regulation of AI and its applications at the federal and state levels has been the subject of a major debate nationwide. Throughout 2025, federal and state governments have clashed over who should decide control over AI regulation, with 36 state attorneys general (AGs) publicly pushing back against a proposed federal ban on state authority. The core dispute here is not whether AI should be regulated (even the AI industry agrees with that), but rather who should have the authority to regulate it. Congress and federal agencies alone? States only? A combination of both? With both sides clashing against each other, here’s the latest on what’s happening among our nation’s AGs on the issue.
A Rare Consensus
Republicans and Democrats do not agree on much these days. However, there is a particular bipartisan coalition that cuts across party lines. On November 25, 2025, the National Association of Attorneys General (NAAG) issued a letter to Congress, signed by a bipartisan group of 36 AGs, opposing a ten-year federal moratorium on the local regulation of AI embedded in the federal budget bill. This letter represented 22 Democrats, 11 Republicans and 3 independents (U.S. Virgin Islands, Northern Mariana Islands and American Samoa). Among the concerns raised by these AGs were the proliferation of “scams powered by AI-generated deepfakes, social media profiles and voice clones.” This argument has broad appeal, since the states are on the front lines of consumer protection/privacy issues, fraud enforcement and child and senior safety concerns. This letter was not preceded or followed by letters from the Republican or Democratic associations of attorneys general, further underscoring the bipartisan nature of the issue.
Seventeen states did not join the November letter, specifically Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kentucky, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming. However, several of these states have separately and openly opposed federal preemption. For example, Arkansas AG Tim Griffin praised the removal of the state regulation ban. Governor Ron DeSantis of Florida also publicly rejected the ban due to unpopular public sentiment and the oppression of states’ rights. Texas has also been active in opposing the federal ban, passing laws to protect child safety when it comes to AI-related matters, with members of both state political parties speaking out on the issue.
Response To NAAG Letter
In July 2025, the U.S. Senate voted 99-1 to remove the proposed 10-year ban on state AI regulation from the federal budget bill. In December 2025, language included in the National Defense Authorization Act to resurrect the ban was deleted. Days later, President Trump signed an executive order entitled “Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence,” echoing what Congress had pushed for in May 2025. Most recently, on June 4, 2026, two members of Congress—Lori Trahan (D-MA) and Jay Obernolte (R-CA)—released draft legislation proposing a shorter, three-year ban on state AI regulation. Its fate remains uncertain.
Conclusion
Despite federal political activity and recent state law developments, the issue of AI regulation remains unsolved. To date, state AGs have successfully pushed back against one broad federal framework for AI regulation, but federal efforts to create a uniform AI framework continue.
