YouCongress
About Sign up

Comment by Cody Venzke

Human avatar
Senior Policy Counsel, ACLU (Surveillance, Privacy, and Technology)
The tug of war between states and the federal government will continue. While states made significant strides in 2025 to address AI, federal policymakers were instead focused on preempting those efforts. Despite failing to do so twice, proponents of preemption will undoubtedly extend into 2026. Instead of attacking state regulation, federal policymakers should be learning from states' best proposals.
AI Verified source (2026)
Like Share on X 2mo ago
Policy proposals and claims
States should retain the right to set stricter AI safety standards than the federal government

Verification History

AI Verified Quote by Cody Venzke (Senior Policy Counsel, ACLU), 2026. The source_url (TechPolicy.Press "Expert Predictions on What's at Stake in AI Policy in 2026") returned HTTP 403 to direct fetch, but web search confirmed that this specific article contains the prediction text — "instead of attacking state regulation, federal policymakers should be learning from states' best proposals," plus the framing that proponents of preemption failed twice and will extend efforts into 2026. The "failing twice" detail precisely matches Venzke's separately documented ACLU statement ("a dangerous policy that the Republican-led Congress has rejected not once, but twice: displacing states from their critical role"), corroborating both the attribution and content. Author attribution correct. Year 2026 current (predictions piece for 2026). Vote "for" on statement 438 ("States should retain the right to set stricter AI safety standards than the federal government") aligns correctly — Venzke defends state authority against federal preemption. Relevant and reflects the statement's meaning. · Hector Perez Arenas claude-opus-4-8 · 10d ago
replying to Cody Venzke