Congress Should Preempt Onslaught of State AI Laws
As states race to regulate artificial intelligence, a chaotic patchwork of laws threatens to slow innovation, drive up compliance costs, and undermine U.S. global competitiveness. In 2023, the National Conference of State Legislatures tracked over 450 AI-related bills introduced across all 50 states, along with Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, and Washington, D.C.
While some legislation focuses on state-specific concerns—such as AI use in public education, local government, or election communications—many states are extending their reach, proposing broad rules that aim to govern AI comprehensively.
For instance, Colorado recently enacted a law requiring companies developing and deploying high-risk AI systems to minimize potential harm. Meanwhile, California appeared to pull back when Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed a state AI safety bill, but the California Privacy Protection Agency continues to develop rules on automated decision-making technologies under the California Consumer Privacy Act, asserting broad regulatory authority over AI through privacy law.
This rush of individual states to regulate AI resembles a chaotic intersection where every driver assumes the right of way. Some states impose aggressive restrictions, while others propose vague laws, resulting in a tangled regulatory environment. Innovators struggle to navigate a maze of conflicting mandates, duplicative obligations, and unclear enforcement risks. Companies face rising legal uncertainty as they attempt to comply with numerous evolving standards.
The trend is accelerating. By March 2025, lawmakers had already introduced more than 550 AI-related bills this session, on track to set another record. If this continues unchecked, the United States will face a web of inconsistent laws that fragment national policy, delay innovation, and create barriers to scaling AI systems across state lines.
This state-level legislation overload strains the limited pool of AI policy experts. Researchers and startups—whose input is crucial for crafting effective rules—cannot meaningfully engage with hundreds of legislative processes happening simultaneously. Instead of enabling thoughtful policymaking, this overload reduces the quality and consistency of the resulting laws.
This scenario poses a significant threat to American leadership in AI. Unlike the United States, China has adopted a centralized national strategy to become the global leader in AI, aligning government, industry, and research. In contrast, a fragmented regulatory environment in the U.S. risks bogging down companies in complex compliance burdens. As each state sets its own rules about how AI models must be tested and deployed, operating at a national scale becomes nearly impossible.
Congress should act to preempt state laws that impose broad requirements on the development and use of AI. This approach does not seek to eliminate all state involvement, especially in clearly local areas. However, when state laws affect interstate commerce—by dictating how AI is built, used, or governed nationally—federal leadership is essential. A consistent national framework would reduce complexity and promote innovation while still allowing for targeted safeguards.
Moreover, the United States should not be pressured into rushing out sweeping AI laws simply to match the EU’s pace. While the EU prides itself on being first with its comprehensive AI Act, this regulatory race may prove self-defeating. Overly broad mandates risk stifling beneficial technologies before they mature and discourage the kind of experimentation that drives progress.
Instead of reinventing the wheel, Congress should focus on identifying specific harms not addressed under existing frameworks and develop narrow, effective legislative responses. Recent bipartisan legislation like the Take It Down Act exemplifies this approach, making it illegal to knowingly share AI-generated sexual abuse material.
AI has enormous potential to improve lives, strengthen the economy, and advance national priorities—but only if innovators have the freedom and clarity to build at scale. Congress should act to replace today’s patchwork of conflicting state laws with a cohesive national approach—one that avoids premature overregulation and keeps America at the forefront of global AI leadership.
