House Commerce Considers 10-Year Moratorium on State AI Enforcement

The proposal drew stern opposition from Democrats at the federal and state levels, including New York Assemblymember Alex Bores, an AI-focused legislator (see 2501090030), who questioned the proposal’s legality in an interview Monday.

Language included in Guthrie’s committee memo says that “no state or political subdivision may enforce any law or regulation regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems during the 10-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.” Guthrie said the committee wants to “unleash” American innovation in support of President Donald Trump’s agenda.

Meanwhile, Senate Commerce Committee Chairman Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said last week he plans to introduce his pro-innovation AI bill.

Bores criticized the Trump administration for rescinding the prior administration’s AI policies and seeking to block states from serving as “laboratories” for the right balance on AI regulation. Blanket preemption is likely unconstitutional, he said.

Additionally, there are likely procedural issues with attempting to pass such a ban via reconciliation, which is filibuster-proof only on fiscal matters, he said: “There are a number of reasons why this is facially flawed. I would love to work with the federal government to have one policy for all of the United States. That is not what this is.”

House Commerce Subcommittee ranking member Jan Schakowsky, D-Ill., on Monday blasted the 10-year moratorium, calling it a “giant gift to Big Tech and once again shows that Republicans care more about profits than people.” It would enable threats to consumer privacy, deepfake abuse and AI-driven profiling, she added.

Several House committees are working through reconciliation language, which the House Budget Committee will consolidate into a single bill to be considered in negotiations with the Senate.

Cruz last week said he plans to file an AI bill modeled after a 10-year internet tax moratorium President Bill Clinton signed in 1998. That moratorium allowed U.S. companies to thrive, and Congress should take a similar “light-touch” approach with AI, instead of embracing European-style regulation, he said.

Ranking member Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., said the U.S. should move fast to ensure the U.S. dominates AI development. She highlighted Congress’ 2024 passage of the Chips Act and said she supports continued National Science Foundation investment enabling public-private partnership on AI.

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce said it supports Cruz and a national policy overriding a patchwork of state regulations: “We look forward to working with him on his forthcoming legislation to encourage AI development, adoption and growth, while empowering small businesses and workers.”

Consumer Reports is opposed to the House language. “This incredibly broad preemption would prevent states from taking action to deal with all sorts of harms,” said Consumer Reports AI Policy Analyst Grace Gedye. “States have passed legislation and are working on rules that would shine a bit of sunlight on how AI is used” and potentially harms consumers.

Federal preemption on AI seems “a lot more likely than a federal privacy bill with preemption,” said Alan Friel, a Squire Patton privacy attorney. Comprehensive privacy laws have been enacted in 20 states, both red and blue. It’s “a bit of a patchwork, but there’s mostly overlap,” and companies have spent “a lot of time, effort and money” complying, said Friel. In contrast, with AI, “it’s all new, and we’re likely to have a much greater patchwork approach.” Only Colorado has a broad AI law, he said, and -- in a May 2024 letter -- “its governor already invited preemption.”