Federal push to block state-level AI laws stalls in Congress despite President Trump’s support

A high-profile effort in Washington to block states from writing their own artificial-intelligence regulations has hit significant resistance, dealing a setback to the tech industry and the Trump administration officials who had pushed for a national standard.

On Tuesday, House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R., La.) said the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) — the annual must-pass bill that funds the Pentagon — will not include federal preemption of state AI rules. The decision removes what had been seen as the most viable legislative vehicle for advancing the proposal this year.

The NDAA “wasn’t the best place” for the measure, Scalise told reporters, though he suggested it could reappear in another bill later. His comments followed those of House Armed Services Committee Chairman Mike Rogers (R., Ala.), who confirmed the preemption plan was no longer under consideration. “From what I hear, it’s kind of lost its momentum. It doesn’t have enough support,” Rogers told Politico.

The move marks a significant defeat for AI companies and their allies. The industry had hoped to secure sweeping federal authority over AI regulation — authority that would supersede state initiatives viewed as costly, inconsistent, or overly restrictive.

President Trump’s Push Fizzles

President Trump threw his weight behind federal preemption last month after Scalise proposed including it in the NDAA. Trump argued that a single nationwide standard was vital for competitiveness, writing on Truth Social: “We MUST have one Federal Standard instead of a patchwork of 50 State Regulatory Regimes. If we don’t, then China will easily catch us in the AI race. Put it in the NDAA, or pass a separate Bill, and nobody will ever be able to compete with America.”

Trump’s endorsement briefly revived momentum after an earlier attempt by Senator Ted Cruz (R., Texas) collapsed over the summer. Cruz’s push to bar states from imposing their own AI safeguards was overwhelmingly rejected, 99–1, after a bipartisan effort led by Senator Marsha Blackburn (R., Tenn.), a moment widely viewed as an early victory for the growing AI-safety coalition.

Bipartisan Resistance at the State and Federal Levels

The latest effort faced even stronger headwinds. Dozens of state legislators and several governors from both parties urged Congress not to embed a ban on state-level AI regulation into the NDAA. Lawmakers from both parties on Capitol Hill also called the proposal a nonstarter.

Senator Josh Hawley (R., Mo.) reacted approvingly to Scalise’s announcement on Tuesday, writing: “Good. This is a terrible provision and should remain OUT.”

A broad coalition of MAGA populists, social conservatives, and Democratic lawmakers opposed the move, arguing that fast-moving AI risks require states to retain regulatory flexibility — especially as the federal government continues debating what a national framework should look like.

Industry and Advocacy Groups Pour Money Into Fight

Behind the scenes, pressure had mounted from both sides. Leading the Future, an AI-industry–backed political organization, launched a $10 million lobbying effort to tie federal preemption to a new nationwide regulatory framework. The contours of that framework remained unclear — and reporting indicated that Cruz and Scalise had discussed a moratorium on state regulations even without accompanying federal guidelines.

Supporters of a federal override argue that businesses should not have to juggle 50 different sets of rules, and they contend that strict regulations in Democratic-run states — particularly California — could end up setting de facto national standards.

In response, AI-safety advocates created a $50 million bipartisan super PAC network to counter the industry push. These advocates argue that “commonsense” guardrails are essential to protect children, promote transparency, curb potential misuse, and prevent China from exploiting weaknesses in U.S. oversight.

Separately, the administration had drafted an executive order aimed at pursuing federal preemption through administrative action. But the order appears to have been shelved after media coverage drew widespread scrutiny.

A Long Fight Ahead

With the NDAA now off the table and no clear alternative legislative vehicle emerging, the preemption effort is effectively stalled. However, few in Washington expect the issue to fade. AI remains a rapidly expanding industry with enormous economic and geopolitical implications — and major political donors are now mobilized on both sides.

As lawmakers prepare to release the House’s NDAA bill later this week, one thing is clear: the battle over who writes the rules for artificial intelligence — Washington or the states — is only beginning.