Washington Imposes a Pause on State AI Regulations

A Federal Bill to Centralize AI Regulations

On June 4, 2026, a bipartisan bill was introduced in the U.S. Congress aimed at suspending all state regulations on the development of artificial intelligence models for three years. This legislation, known as the "Great American AI Act," is sponsored by Republican Jay Obernolte from California and Democrat Lori Trahan from Massachusetts. Four other members of Congress, two Republicans and two Democrats, have already expressed their support. The proposal includes a federal preemption clause that would nullify existing state laws, while also allocating $300 million, approximately €277 million, to a new evaluation office for large AI models within the Department of Commerce, an initiative that Donald Trump had attempted to establish by executive order just days earlier without funding.

Impact on California and Colorado Legislation

In California, two existing laws would be directly affected by this bill. The AB 2013 law, which requires developers to publish summaries of their training data, and part of the SB 942 law, which concerns the labeling of AI-generated content, would be nullified. In Colorado, the SB 205 law, which was set to take effect on June 30, 2026, and regulates high-risk AI systems, would also be impacted. Despite this, polls conducted by the Tech Oversight Project show that 56% of Jay Obernolte's constituents and 63% of Lori Trahan's constituents oppose weakening local laws regarding AI-related risks.

Growing Opposition from States

Thirty-six state attorneys general have signed a joint opposition to any broad federal preemption on AI. This standoff is not limited to Congress. Since December 2025, the Department of Justice has established a task force dedicated to legally challenging state laws deemed contrary to federal policy, notably joining the lawsuit filed by xAI against Colorado's law. However, the Great American AI Act is currently just a draft submitted for public consultation.

Reactions and Criticism

Public Citizen, an organization critical of Donald Trump's administration, has labeled the proposal a "disastrous proposition," highlighting that major tech companies seem to celebrate it. J.B. Branch, AI governance advisor at Public Citizen, criticized the federal preemption, stating that it would replace state protections with an inadequate federal framework in a divided Congress. The text also omits crucial issues such as algorithmic discrimination, consumer fraud, the effects of AI on young people's mental health, and deepfakes. Public Citizen has cited polling numbers to emphasize local opposition and criticize the proposal. Brendan Steinhauser, executive director of the Alliance for Secure AI, praised the bipartisan nature of the bill but opposed the preemption clause, arguing that it deprives states of their own safeguards against the risks of advanced AI.