White House Unveils National AI Legislative Framework Urging Congress to Preempt State Regulation
The Trump administration released a seven-pillar legislative blueprint on March 20 that asks Congress to override state AI laws and adopt a light-touch federal approach, drawing opposition from both parties.
The Trump administration on March 20 released a National AI Legislative Framework laying out seven policy pillars it wants Congress to codify into law, marking the most concrete federal attempt to shape comprehensive AI regulation in the United States. Developed by White House AI Czar David Sacks and Office of Science and Technology Policy Director Michael Kratsios, the document builds on an executive order signed in December 2025 and calls for a unified federal approach that would override a growing patchwork of state-level AI laws.
Seven Pillars of Federal AI Policy
The framework organizes its recommendations around seven legislative priorities: protecting children and empowering parents, safeguarding American communities and small businesses, respecting intellectual property rights, preventing censorship and protecting free speech, enabling innovation, developing an AI-ready workforce, and establishing federal preemption of state AI laws.
On child safety, the framework calls on Congress to require AI platforms to implement privacy-protective age verification and parental controls, while mandating safeguards against the sexual exploitation and self-harm of minors. The administration also urges legislation to prevent residential electricity rate increases caused by new data center construction, a provision it calls the “Ratepayer Protection Pledge.”
The intellectual property section takes a position that will likely draw scrutiny from the creative industry: it affirms that training AI models on copyrighted material available online does not constitute copyright infringement, while calling for voluntary licensing frameworks between AI developers and content creators.
State Preemption at the Core
The most contentious element of the framework is its call for federal preemption of state AI regulation. The White House stated that “the Federal government is uniquely positioned to set a consistent national policy that enables us to win the AI race,” arguing that “a patchwork of conflicting state laws would undermine American innovation.”
Specifically, the framework asks Congress to prohibit states from regulating AI development, imposing what the administration characterizes as “undue burdens” on lawful AI use, or holding AI developers liable for third-party misuse of their models. However, the document carves out exceptions that would preserve state authority over child protection laws, consumer fraud prevention, traditional police powers, state AI procurement decisions, and zoning rules for data center siting.
The framework also recommends that Congress reject creating any new federal rulemaking body dedicated to AI, instead favoring a sector-specific approach in which existing regulatory agencies oversee AI within their jurisdictions. It further urges that the federal government be barred from “coercing technology providers to ban, compel, or alter content based on partisan or ideological agendas.”
Bipartisan Opposition Emerges
Despite its pro-innovation framing, the framework has drawn criticism from across the political spectrum. More than 50 Republican lawmakers signed a letter to the administration earlier in March arguing that “recent attempts to halt state AI legislation suggest not merely a desire for coordination, but an effort to prevent the passage of measures holding the tech industry accountable.”
Democrats have responded with legislative action. Dozens of House Democrats, including Representatives Ted Lieu of California and Don Beyer of Virginia, introduced a bill on the same day the framework was released that would repeal the December executive order aimed at overriding state AI laws. Senator Brian Schatz of Hawaii is preparing a companion bill in the Senate. “Until federal action ensures safe and responsible AI development, deployment, and use, states must retain the ability to implement policies to protect the American public,” Beyer stated.
Americans for Responsible Innovation, a nonprofit advocacy group, offered a sharper critique, warning that the framework “shields developers from accountability” by simultaneously recommending that Congress ban state AI laws and decline to create new federal liability for the AI industry regarding child harms.
Industry Support and Political Dynamics
The framework has found support among technology trade groups. The Business Software Alliance endorsed its workforce development and data access provisions, while NetChoice praised its “light-touch regulatory environment” approach. House Speaker Mike Johnson and four Republican representatives pledged support for the framework, emphasizing the need to maintain AI leadership while protecting American families.
The framework’s provisions are expected to advance through Congress in separate legislative tracks rather than as a single comprehensive bill. Child safety and ratepayer protection measures enjoy bipartisan appeal and may move faster than the more divisive preemption provisions, particularly with the 2026 midterm elections approaching. In the meantime, state AI laws already in effect, including Colorado’s AI Act and California’s AI Transparency Act, remain enforceable until federal preemption legislation is enacted.