Donald Trump has announced plans to issue new executive orders that would impose national rules for artificial intelligence across the United States, marking one of the most aggressive moves yet to centralize control over how AI is governed in America. The proposal is being described as a “One Rulebook” approach, designed to replace the growing patchwork of state level AI laws with a single federal standard. The announcement came through Trump’s public statements and social media posts, where he argued that American companies cannot compete globally if they are forced to follow fifty different sets of rules at the state level. Politico+1
According to Trump, the current system is slowing innovation and putting U.S. companies at a disadvantage compared to foreign rivals, especially China. He has said that businesses should not have to get separate approvals from dozens of states every time they want to deploy or update AI systems. His planned executive orders would aim to override conflicting state laws, use legal challenges to block state enforcement, and in some cases tie federal funding to compliance with the new national framework. The News International
This move sits at the center of a heated national debate. On one side, major technology companies and many industry groups have been calling for federal action. They argue that a single national standard would give them clarity and predictability. On the other side, state lawmakers and governors warn that the president does not have the constitutional authority to simply wipe out state laws through executive orders. They argue that only Congress can formally preempt state regulations.
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis has already pushed back strongly against Trump’s plan. He said the executive order cannot legally prevent states from protecting their own residents. Florida has been working on its own AI protections, including proposals that would limit the use of AI in sensitive decisions like insurance claims without human oversight. DeSantis framed the proposed federal move as an overreach and warned that it could leave consumers less protected if weaker national rules replace stricter state laws. Politico
Trump’s latest plan does not come out of nowhere. Earlier in 2025, he signed Executive Order 14179, titled “Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence.” That order aimed to roll back policies from the previous administration and shift the focus toward faster development and fewer restrictions on AI. It also prioritized U.S. dominance in global AI development and directed agencies to revise or cancel regulations seen as slowing innovation. Wikipedia
One of Trump’s first moves after returning to office was to rescind President Joe Biden’s AI executive order, which had focused on “safe, secure, and trustworthy” AI development. Trump’s team argued that Biden’s framework created unnecessary red tape and could allow other countries to leap ahead while the U.S. became stuck in compliance and review. Wikipedia
The new executive orders would go much further. Instead of just loosening rules, they would actively impose a national system and attempt to override state authority. Drafts of these plans reportedly include legal strategies to preempt state laws and pressure states through federal funding mechanisms. Trump has also hinted that federal agencies would be instructed to standardize how AI is approved, tested, and deployed across industries. Politico+1
Supporters of the plan say the U.S. cannot afford to move slowly. China and other countries are rapidly expanding their AI capabilities. In recent statements, Trump tied the new rules directly to national security and economic survival. He argued that too many local laws will drive innovation offshore and weaken America’s leadership in one of the most powerful technologies in history. Politico
At the same time, Trump has made controversial moves on AI exports. He recently announced that Nvidia would be allowed to sell advanced H200 AI chips to certain Chinese customers, a sharp shift from earlier restrictions. This decision angered many lawmakers who worry about strengthening China’s AI capabilities. Trump defended the move by saying that smarter rules, not blanket bans, will help the U.S. maintain control and benefit economically. Financial Times
Critics see a contradiction in these policies. On one side, Trump wants tighter, centralized control at home. On the other side, he is loosening restrictions on AI hardware going overseas. Supporters respond that the larger goal is to keep the U.S. at the center of global AI supply chains, rather than pushing business and influence to other countries.
Another major question is how far an executive order can really go. The U.S. Constitution gives Congress the main power to regulate interstate commerce. That includes technology and digital services. Executive orders can direct how federal agencies behave, but courts have often struck down attempts by presidents to override states without clear backing from Congress. Legal experts expect multiple lawsuits if Trump tries to block state AI laws purely by executive action.
Despite these legal risks, Trump’s team seems ready to move forward. The White House has framed the upcoming orders as urgent and necessary. Officials close to the process have said the administration believes it can justify broader federal authority under national security and interstate commerce arguments. They also point to past court cases where federal standards have replaced state rules in areas like aviation and communications.
In Silicon Valley, reaction has been mixed but mostly supportive at the corporate level. Large tech firms often prefer one clear set of rules rather than dozens of state specific requirements. Many startup founders also say it is nearly impossible for a small company to comply with different AI laws in California, New York, Colorado, and other states at the same time. A national framework could lower their legal risk and speed up product launches.
Privacy advocates and civil rights groups are far more skeptical. They fear that a national standard created through executive order could be weaker than existing state protections. California, for example, has some of the strongest digital privacy and AI related rules in the country. If those are overridden by a lighter federal framework, consumers could lose real protections. These groups are already preparing legal challenges.
Trump has been clear that he views AI as both an opportunity and a threat. In his public statements, he talks about AI as a tool that can boost productivity, strengthen the military, and grow the economy. At the same time, he warns that if the U.S. does not control it properly, other countries could dominate the field and use it against American interests.
The political timing also matters. AI regulation has been stalled in Congress for months. Lawmakers from both parties have proposed bills, but none have passed. By moving through executive orders, Trump can act quickly without waiting for votes. That gives him speed, but it also makes the rules more vulnerable to lawsuits and reversal by future administrations.
Another piece of this story is how federal agencies would handle the new power. Agencies like the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Commerce, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology would likely be directed to create technical standards and enforcement systems. This would require massive coordination and funding. Some experts warn that the government does not yet have enough AI expertise to manage such a sweeping framework effectively.
There is also a global dimension. Other countries are moving forward with their own AI laws. The European Union already has broad AI regulations in place. China is building strict controls over algorithms and data. Trump’s plan is meant to give the U.S. a unified voice in global talks about AI standards. Supporters believe this could strengthen America’s position in international negotiations.
Still, the central conflict remains unresolved. States do not want to give up their authority. Several governors have signaled they will challenge the orders in court if they try to cancel existing state laws. Florida is not alone. Other states, including California and New York, are reportedly reviewing their legal options as they wait for the final text of the executive orders. Politico
Trump has said the executive orders could be signed within days. Once signed, they would kick off a wave of legal, political, and business responses. Lawsuits could be filed within hours. Congress could respond with its own legislation, either to support or block the move. Federal agencies would scramble to interpret and apply the new commands.
For ordinary Americans, the impact may not be immediately visible, but it could shape how AI appears in daily life. From automated customer service to medical software, financial tools, and workplace systems, AI is already embedded across society. Who makes the rules, how strict they are, and who enforces them will affect privacy, safety, and access to new technology for years to come.
Trump has framed the plan in simple terms. One country, one set of rules, faster innovation. Critics frame it differently. Less local control, fewer safeguards, more power concentrated in the executive branch. Both sides agree on one thing. AI is no longer a side issue. It is now a core part of national policy, economic competition, and political power.
As this unfolds, the biggest uncertainty is how the courts will respond. If judges uphold the executive orders, it could mark a major shift in federal power over technology. If they strike them down, it could force Congress to finally pass comprehensive AI legislation. Either way, Trump’s move has pushed AI to the top of the national agenda in a way no previous administration has done.
For now, the country is watching and waiting. The executive orders are expected soon. The legal challenges are almost guaranteed. And the future of AI regulation in the United States is about to enter one of its most intense and consequential chapters. Politico+1
0 Comments