The post Tech giants lose second attempt to preempt state AI laws appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Tech giants face their second major setback this year after lawmakers refused to use the defense bill to stop states from making and enforcing their own AI rules. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise says the defense bill is not the right place to add language that would block state AI laws. Congress says no to stopping states from making their own AI rules The tech industry attempted to use the National Defense Authorization Act to prevent states from creating their own AI regulations, but Congress has blocked their efforts. Companies like Meta, OpenAI, Google, and Andreessen Horowitz sought to have Congress enact a rule that would establish a single national AI law, superseding stricter regulations in states like California and New York. The companies said one rule will make it easier to follow the law and avoid the confusion that comes from different state rules. Lawmakers on the House and Senate Armed Services Committees opposed the proposal, arguing that adding a narrow AI law to a large military bill was inappropriate. This is the second time Congress has blocked similar efforts to override state AI laws, as the Senate voted 99–1 against a measure that aimed to limit state power over AI earlier this year. Most lawmakers argue that states should retain the authority to regulate AI, prioritising the protection of people over concerns about costs and differing regulations.  However, both sides of Congress say the discussions aren’t over, and lawmakers could still make a federal rule that works alongside state laws, but only if it respects states’ power and protects the public.  White House and tech leaders try to change minds, but do not get the support they want White House AI chief David Sacks spent days working with top Republican leaders in Congress and executives from some of the biggest… The post Tech giants lose second attempt to preempt state AI laws appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Tech giants face their second major setback this year after lawmakers refused to use the defense bill to stop states from making and enforcing their own AI rules. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise says the defense bill is not the right place to add language that would block state AI laws. Congress says no to stopping states from making their own AI rules The tech industry attempted to use the National Defense Authorization Act to prevent states from creating their own AI regulations, but Congress has blocked their efforts. Companies like Meta, OpenAI, Google, and Andreessen Horowitz sought to have Congress enact a rule that would establish a single national AI law, superseding stricter regulations in states like California and New York. The companies said one rule will make it easier to follow the law and avoid the confusion that comes from different state rules. Lawmakers on the House and Senate Armed Services Committees opposed the proposal, arguing that adding a narrow AI law to a large military bill was inappropriate. This is the second time Congress has blocked similar efforts to override state AI laws, as the Senate voted 99–1 against a measure that aimed to limit state power over AI earlier this year. Most lawmakers argue that states should retain the authority to regulate AI, prioritising the protection of people over concerns about costs and differing regulations.  However, both sides of Congress say the discussions aren’t over, and lawmakers could still make a federal rule that works alongside state laws, but only if it respects states’ power and protects the public.  White House and tech leaders try to change minds, but do not get the support they want White House AI chief David Sacks spent days working with top Republican leaders in Congress and executives from some of the biggest…

Tech giants lose second attempt to preempt state AI laws

For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at [email protected]

Tech giants face their second major setback this year after lawmakers refused to use the defense bill to stop states from making and enforcing their own AI rules.

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise says the defense bill is not the right place to add language that would block state AI laws.

Congress says no to stopping states from making their own AI rules

The tech industry attempted to use the National Defense Authorization Act to prevent states from creating their own AI regulations, but Congress has blocked their efforts. Companies like Meta, OpenAI, Google, and Andreessen Horowitz sought to have Congress enact a rule that would establish a single national AI law, superseding stricter regulations in states like California and New York. The companies said one rule will make it easier to follow the law and avoid the confusion that comes from different state rules.

Lawmakers on the House and Senate Armed Services Committees opposed the proposal, arguing that adding a narrow AI law to a large military bill was inappropriate.

This is the second time Congress has blocked similar efforts to override state AI laws, as the Senate voted 99–1 against a measure that aimed to limit state power over AI earlier this year. Most lawmakers argue that states should retain the authority to regulate AI, prioritising the protection of people over concerns about costs and differing regulations. 

However, both sides of Congress say the discussions aren’t over, and lawmakers could still make a federal rule that works alongside state laws, but only if it respects states’ power and protects the public. 

White House and tech leaders try to change minds, but do not get the support they want

White House AI chief David Sacks spent days working with top Republican leaders in Congress and executives from some of the biggest AI companies in the United States. He and his team said a single national rule for AI will make it easier for companies to follow the law, boost innovations, and prevent countries like China from getting ahead of the U.S.

However, lawmakers disagreed, arguing that states must retain the power to hold companies accountable if AI products cause harm. Senate Majority Leader John Thune stated that the White House attempted to find a middle ground. Still, Congress was unwilling to grant tech companies a broad exemption or weaken state authority in any way.

President Donald Trump publicly asked Congress to block state-level AI rules, stating that using preemption language in the defense bill would protect U.S. companies and help them compete globally. However, even with the commander-in-chief and big tech companies working hand in hand to push the bill, Congress remained unswayed. Many lawmakers on the Armed Services Committee said the pleading parties rushed the decision and that it isn’t right for a bill focused on national defense. They warned that adding an AI law, which most AI companies are pushing for, to the defense bill would threaten the safety of citizens, workers, and communities. 

Tech companies are expected to continue pushing next year, as they believe the political situation will shift in their favor. States can still create and enforce their own AI rules that companies must follow. This goes to show just how strong a decision from Congress can be even when the White House, big tech, and whole presidents stand against it. 

Get seen where it counts. Advertise in Cryptopolitan Research and reach crypto’s sharpest investors and builders.

Source: https://www.cryptopolitan.com/tech-lose-attempt-to-preempt-state-ai-laws/

Market Opportunity
null Logo
null Price(null)
--
----
USD
null (null) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Why Localization Services Matter for Software Companies

Why Localization Services Matter for Software Companies

Rarely does software designed for one market translate smoothly to another. The most obvious obstacle is language, but it’s not the only one. Before a product feels
Share
Techbullion2026/03/25 19:10
₹71L CoinDCX Fraud Case Turns, Court Finds No Link to Founders

₹71L CoinDCX Fraud Case Turns, Court Finds No Link to Founders

Court grants bail to CoinDCX founders after ₹71L scam traced to fake site; no link found, funds recovered, platform secure. The court granted bail to CoinDCX founders
Share
LiveBitcoinNews2026/03/25 19:43
UK crypto holders brace for FCA’s expanded regulatory reach

UK crypto holders brace for FCA’s expanded regulatory reach

The post UK crypto holders brace for FCA’s expanded regulatory reach appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. British crypto holders may soon face a very different landscape as the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) moves to expand its regulatory reach in the industry. A new consultation paper outlines how the watchdog intends to apply its rulebook to crypto firms, shaping everything from asset safeguarding to trading platform operation. According to the financial regulator, these proposals would translate into clearer protections for retail investors and stricter oversight of crypto firms. UK FCA plans Until now, UK crypto users mostly encountered the FCA through rules on promotions and anti-money laundering checks. The consultation paper goes much further. It proposes direct oversight of stablecoin issuers, custodians, and crypto-asset trading platforms (CATPs). For investors, that means the wallets, exchanges, and coins they rely on could soon be subject to the same governance and resilience standards as traditional financial institutions. The regulator has also clarified that firms need official authorization before serving customers. This condition should, in theory, reduce the risk of sudden platform failures or unclear accountability. David Geale, the FCA’s executive director of payments and digital finance, said the proposals are designed to strike a balance between innovation and protection. He explained: “We want to develop a sustainable and competitive crypto sector – balancing innovation, market integrity and trust.” Geale noted that while the rules will not eliminate investment risks, they will create consistent standards, helping consumers understand what to expect from registered firms. Why does this matter for crypto holders? The UK regulatory framework shift would provide safer custody of assets, better disclosure of risks, and clearer recourse if something goes wrong. However, the regulator was also frank in its submission, arguing that no rulebook can eliminate the volatility or inherent risks of holding digital assets. Instead, the focus is on ensuring that when consumers choose to invest, they do…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/17 23:52