Trump Seizes Control: One AI Rulebook to Crush State 'Chaos'

Paul Riverbank, 12/9/2025President Trump’s sweeping executive order seeks a single, federal rulebook for AI, igniting a fierce debate over states’ rights, Big Tech influence, and America’s global edge. As industry leaders cheer and political factions clash, the nation’s technological future—and regulatory balance—hang in the balance.

Writing recently on Truth Social, Trump declared his intention to end the state-by-state scramble and impose a single, unified approach: “There must be only One Rulebook if we are going to continue to lead in AI.” He’s expected to issue an executive order blocking states from creating their own rules for this rapidly evolving technology, contending that anything less would throttle America’s ability to outpace rivals like China and the European Union.

“WE ARE BEATING ALL COUNTRIES at this point in the race," Trump posted in his unmistakable style, "but that won’t last long if we are going to have 50 States, many of them bad actors, involved in RULES and the APPROVAL PROCESS. THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT ABOUT THIS! AI WILL BE DESTROYED IN ITS INFANCY!”

Trump’s urgency comes after several unsuccessful attempts on Capitol Hill to rein in state experimentation on AI. Provisions that would have paused state-level regulation were quietly buried in both a defense package and a Republican tax scheme, only to meet resistance from an unlikely alliance of lawmakers—including some of the president’s own allies. At the heart of the opposition is the states’ rights refrain, championed loudly in recent weeks by Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene as her time in Congress winds down.

What’s less clear is whether Trump’s most fervent supporters are on board with Big Tech having a hand in drafting the AI rulebook. Steve Bannon, a key figure in MAGA politics, has already raised alarm bells over the administration’s coziness with Silicon Valley insiders. The appointment of investor David Sacks as the White House’s new AI and crypto czar has only deepened suspicions in some corners, fueling arguments that “working too closely with tech titans” risks sidelining concerns about jobs, market disruption, and privacy.

Still, industry leaders see things differently. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang flatly warned reporters that “state by state AI regulation would drag this industry to a halt—and it would create a national security concern, as we need to make sure that United States advances AI technology as quickly as possible.” Sundar Pichai of Google, speaking on Fox News, wondered aloud how American firms can keep pace with China if every state imposes its own maze of rules.

All of this plays out against a backdrop of dizzying legislative activity. From California to Florida, states aren’t waiting for Washington to act. Some have focused on privacy safeguards and consumer protections, while others target the use of AI in hiring, elections, or even police work. The Trump White House seems poised to override it all—not only threatening legal action against states seen as going too far, but also dangling the prospect of withholding federal broadband funding if they don’t back down.

Predictably, constitutional and practical questions abound. Whether a president can simply preempt state law by fiat is murky at best; interstate commerce provisions and separation-of-powers concerns lurk just beneath the surface. Lawyers on both sides are bracing for a protracted fight, likely to echo throughout the courts and the campaign trail.

At its core, this is not just about the balance of power between state and federal governments. It’s very much about America’s future standing in the world: Will a patchwork of local rules bog down innovation, or will a heavy federal hand kill the very experimentation that drives progress? Trump and his backers see a singular, federally mandated system as the only way to stay ahead of global competitors. His critics warn of regulatory overreach, the potential capture of rulemaking by tech giants, and a loss of local control.

Congress, notably, has yet to reach consensus. Efforts to shoehorn AI curbs into the annual defense bill fizzled, stymied by crosscurrents of skepticism—some lawmakers fearful of Big Tech’s influence, others wary of ceding ground to adversaries abroad.

The president’s gambit amounts to a high-stakes wager: That decisive national action on AI regulation will secure American dominance for years to come. Supporters hail the move as essential; detractors, of all ideological stripes, see danger in a “one-size-fits-all” mandate from Washington. Regardless of how it unfolds, two things are certain—the clash will be bruising, and the outcome will leave a mark on the nation's technological trajectory for years to come.

For the past several months, a fresh power struggle around artificial intelligence has unfolded—not just in Silicon Valley or Washington, but in statehouses across the country. With Congress gridlocked and more than a thousand pieces of AI legislation churning in state legislatures, President Trump has stepped squarely into the fray with a proposal that’s as sweeping as it is contentious.Writing recently on Truth Social, Trump declared his intention to end the state-by-state scramble and impose a single, unified approach: “There must be only One Rulebook if we are going to continue to lead in AI.” He’s expected to issue an executive order blocking states from creating their own rules for this rapidly evolving technology, contending that anything less would throttle America’s ability to outpace rivals like China and the European Union.“WE ARE BEATING ALL COUNTRIES at this point in the race," Trump posted in his unmistakable style, "but that won’t last long if we are going to have 50 States, many of them bad actors, involved in RULES and the APPROVAL PROCESS. THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT ABOUT THIS! AI WILL BE DESTROYED IN ITS INFANCY!”Trump’s urgency comes after several unsuccessful attempts on Capitol Hill to rein in state experimentation on AI. Provisions that would have paused state-level regulation were quietly buried in both a defense package and a Republican tax scheme, only to meet resistance from an unlikely alliance of lawmakers—including some of the president’s own allies. At the heart of the opposition is the states’ rights refrain, championed loudly in recent weeks by Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene as her time in Congress winds down.What’s less clear is whether Trump’s most fervent supporters are on board with Big Tech having a hand in drafting the AI rulebook. Steve Bannon, a key figure in MAGA politics, has already raised alarm bells over the administration’s coziness with Silicon Valley insiders. The appointment of investor David Sacks as the White House’s new AI and crypto czar has only deepened suspicions in some corners, fueling arguments that “working too closely with tech titans” risks sidelining concerns about jobs, market disruption, and privacy.Still, industry leaders see things differently. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang flatly warned reporters that “state by state AI regulation would drag this industry to a halt—and it would create a national security concern, as we need to make sure that United States advances AI technology as quickly as possible.” Sundar Pichai of Google, speaking on Fox News, wondered aloud how American firms can keep pace with China if every state imposes its own maze of rules.All of this plays out against a backdrop of dizzying legislative activity. From California to Florida, states aren’t waiting for Washington to act. Some have focused on privacy safeguards and consumer protections, while others target the use of AI in hiring, elections, or even police work. The Trump White House seems poised to override it all—not only threatening legal action against states seen as going too far, but also dangling the prospect of withholding federal broadband funding if they don’t back down.Predictably, constitutional and practical questions abound. Whether a president can simply preempt state law by fiat is murky at best; interstate commerce provisions and separation-of-powers concerns lurk just beneath the surface. Lawyers on both sides are bracing for a protracted fight, likely to echo throughout the courts and the campaign trail.At its core, this is not just about the balance of power between state and federal governments. It’s very much about America’s future standing in the world: Will a patchwork of local rules bog down innovation, or will a heavy federal hand kill the very experimentation that drives progress? Trump and his backers see a singular, federally mandated system as the only way to stay ahead of global competitors. His critics warn of regulatory overreach, the potential capture of rulemaking by tech giants, and a loss of local control.Congress, notably, has yet to reach consensus. Efforts to shoehorn AI curbs into the annual defense bill fizzled, stymied by crosscurrents of skepticism—some lawmakers fearful of Big Tech’s influence, others wary of ceding ground to adversaries abroad.The president’s gambit amounts to a high-stakes wager: That decisive national action on AI regulation will secure American dominance for years to come. Supporters hail the move as essential; detractors, of all ideological stripes, see danger in a “one-size-fits-all” mandate from Washington. Regardless of how it unfolds, two things are certain—the clash will be bruising, and the outcome will leave a mark on the nation's technological trajectory for years to come.