President Trump signed an executive order to limit state regulation of artificial intelligence, empowering the attorney general to challenge state laws and threatening to withhold federal broadband funding from states the administration deems overly restrictive. Supporters say a federal framework is necessary to avoid a costly patchwork of 50 different state rules and to attract private investment; critics argue the move bypasses Congress and endangers states’ rights and safety protections. The order deepens divisions within the GOP and is likely to trigger legal fights and further political debate.
Trump’s Executive Order on AI Sparks Rift With MAGA Allies Over States’ Rights
President Donald Trump’s recent executive order aimed at limiting state-level regulation of artificial intelligence (AI) has ignited a public split with several MAGA-aligned Republicans on Capitol Hill. The White House says the directive is intended to prevent a fragmented state-by-state regulatory regime that could deter investment and slow U.S. leadership in AI, but critics argue it circumvents Congress and undermines states’ authority and safety protections.
What the Order Does
The executive order empowers Attorney General Pam Bondi to sue states whose AI laws the administration deems “inconsistent” with federal policy. It also includes language that could restrict states’ access to federal broadband funding if the administration labels their AI regulations “onerous.” The White House frames the move as a way to keep the United States competitive and avoid the practical difficulties companies would face seeking approvals from 50 different states.
Republican Reactions and Internal GOP Split
Republicans are sharply divided. Some, like Senate Commerce Committee Chair Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), praised the order as a step toward promoting American leadership in AI. Others—particularly conservative voices who prioritize states’ rights—criticized the president for sidestepping Congress.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) struck a cautious tone, arguing that while Republicans generally support state authority, the interstate nature of AI warrants a federal framework:
“We’re all pretty much federalists ... when you have interstate commerce with something like AI … you kind of need some sort of a federal framework, and I think that’s what the president and his team were recognizing.” — Sen. John Thune
But staunch state-rights defenders such as Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Ga.) warned they would oppose any legislation or actions that effectively impose a long moratorium on state regulation. Steve Bannon also criticized the order for alienating the MAGA base.
Administration Assurances and Legal Limits
To placate child-safety advocates, the White House’s top AI adviser David Sacks said the administration would not push back on state laws specifically designed to protect children and adolescents. Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-Tenn.) has pledged to work to ensure the order is implemented with child-safety and creators’ rights in mind.
Legal experts and Republican critics, including Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, pointed out limits on executive authority: an executive order cannot permanently preempt state law the way an act of Congress can under Article I powers. DeSantis argued that states retain the ability to regulate and that the order may actually encourage some state-level safety measures.
Political Context and What Comes Next
Trump’s order follows failed attempts by House Republicans to add state-preemption language to the National Defense Authorization Act and a separate reconciliation package. The controversy highlights a broader GOP debate over federal preemption, innovation policy, economic competitiveness and safety regulation. Expect both political pushback from state-rights conservatives and legal challenges from states over the coming months.
Key Quotes
“We have the big investment coming, but if they had to get 50 different approvals from 50 different states, you can forget it because it’s impossible to do.” — President Donald Trump
“Kid safety, we’re going to protect. We’re not pushing back on that.” — David Sacks, White House AI Adviser
Bottom line: The executive order is a high-stakes push to centralize AI policy at the federal level, but its legal reach, political durability and effects on states’ policy choices remain uncertain.
