States should retain the right to set stricter AI safety standards than the federal government

ai-safety policy regulations ai-regulation ai-policy us-congress gov

Share this with your representatives, journalists and friends

Key insights

Both sides repeatedly invoke safety, transparency, accountability, and innovation; they mainly disagree about which level of government can best deliver them.
Many pro-state quotes make their case contingent on weak or absent federal action, arguing states should act until stronger national protections exist.
Several nuanced quotes reject all-or-nothing preemption and instead propose federal baselines, issue-by-issue preemption, or other limited forms of federal override.
Supportive quotes often come from governors, state legislators, and state attorneys general focused on residents, children, workers, and consumers, while opposing quotes frequently come from federal officials, trade groups, and national policy advocates focused on interstate consistency and competitiveness.
Independent testing, audits, transparency, and evaluation recur in pro-state quotes as concrete tools for building trust in advanced AI systems.

Arguments for

Filling federal gaps

Supporters argue that states should retain stronger authority because federal safeguards are absent, stalled, or being weakened while AI capabilities are advancing quickly. In that situation, state action is described as the practical way to put guardrails, transparency, and accountability in place now.

As AI systems become more powerful and the federal government is unwilling to step in, states have a responsibility to protect our people from the dangers of AI while still harnessing the unique potential of the technology. People want protections from the risks of AI and Illinoi…

JB Pritzker · Jul 6, 2026 · full quote
Frontier model AI systems have the potential to be used for many good things. However, due to their massive computing power, they also could cause catastrophic events, such as cyberattacks or the system evading control by developers or users. In the absence of federal oversight o…

Kwame Raoul · Jul 6, 2026 · full quote
We can no longer wait for Washington, D.C. to do the right thing and enact protections over these digital tools that give parents more control—it is time for the states to take action. This bill strikes a good balance between protecting children, ensuring workers are being treate…

Ned Lamont · Jun 2, 2026 · full quote
In today's lawless, Wild West artificial intelligence environment, states have been leading the charge to implement safeguards addressing serious risks ranging from algorithmic bias to data privacy and consumer protection. But the Trump White House aims to kill state AI laws with…

Don Beyer · 2026 · full quote
We need meaningful safeguards on AI to address the harms they cause. That is why we cannot tell states to stand down from protecting their kids, especially when we need Congress to put standards in place. [...] I think we need to be very loud and clear that the federal government…

Maria Cantwell · Jan 15, 2026 · full quote
The federal government must not grant tech giants a blank check to deploy these technologies without the oversight of states.

American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) · Jun 4, 2026 · full quote

Protecting local harms

Backers say states must be able to protect their own residents from concrete harms to children, workers, consumers, families, and local communities. They point to issues such as predatory chatbots, deepfakes, hiring discrimination, election interference, and local public-safety impacts as matters state leaders are responsible for addressing.

As state lawmakers, we take seriously our responsibility to safeguard our constituents from AI harms to children, workers, artists and creators, families, and consumers. GAAIA’s broad preemption provisions would freeze a sweeping set of state laws and tie the hands of lawmakers a…

State Lawmakers Letter: GAAIA State AI Law Preemption · Jun 16, 2026 · full quote
States must be able to protect their own residents from harm, hold tech companies accountable, and ensure that AI is safe and trustworthy.

Jina John · Jun 4, 2026 · full quote
It’s incumbent on state legislators to protect the welfare of our young people. We should employ policy measures that take the onus off K-12 students to protect themselves from predatory use of A.I. chatbots and generative deepfakes.

Chris Pielli · Mar 19, 2026 · full quote
This proposal lacks meaningful guardrails and ignores the real impacts AI is already having on jobs, communities, and local resources - from rising energy demand and skyrocketing costs to increased water use. It also takes the wrong approach by attempting to preempt state and loc…

Valerie Foushee · Mar 20, 2026 · full quote
Broad state preemption, in the form of presidential executive authority and the failed congressional moratorium, trades real protection against demonstrable harms, such as deepfake-generated child sexual abuse material (CSAM), AI-driven election fraud, and automated hiring discri…

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld · 2026 · full quote
The Constitution reserves a lot of power to the states in particular areas [like] public safety, which can pertain to issues that AI touches like deepfakes, election interference, and regulating how technology shows up in mental health care.

Deborah Ross · 2026 · full quote

Floor, not ceiling

A major pro-state argument is that any federal law should be a floor, not a ceiling. Broad preemption is described as freezing state laws, tying lawmakers' hands, and blocking even light-touch transparency, evaluation, or accountability measures as new risks emerge.

Federal preemption of state AI laws should proceed on a narrow, issue-by-issue basis. Broad preemption of a vaguely defined and poorly understood category of state laws would, in all likelihood, be a disaster, for both political and policy reasons.

Charlie Bullock · Jul 8, 2026 · full quote
There have been efforts, however, to prevent states from enacting new protections and to nullify existing state safeguards—leaving workers vulnerable when employers deploy discriminatory and exploitative AI systems in the workplace. Any federal legislation should be a floor, not …

Tanya L. Goldman · Feb 3, 2026 · full quote
Any federal AI law should serve as a floor, not a ceiling, preserving flexibility for states to go further where necessary to protect their residents.

Rob Bonta · 2025 · full quote
The sweeping preemption clause in this bill goes far beyond replacing state laws that might conflict or duplicate this federal framework. It locks states out of even simple, light-touch transparency and evaluation regulations for other kinds of harms or risks. We cannot advance A…

Nicholas Garcia · Jun 4, 2026 · full quote
This bill takes the current floor on state AI legislation and turns it into a federal ceiling, preventing state lawmakers from addressing emerging AI harms in an era of fast-moving technology. Over the past two decades, state lawmakers have proven to be a backstop for tech accoun…

Brad Carson · Jun 4, 2026 · full quote
As state lawmakers, we take seriously our responsibility to safeguard our constituents from AI harms to children, workers, artists and creators, families, and consumers. GAAIA’s broad preemption provisions would freeze a sweeping set of state laws and tie the hands of lawmakers a…

State Lawmakers Letter: GAAIA State AI Law Preemption · Jun 16, 2026 · full quote

State policy laboratories

Supporters also portray states as laboratories for responsible innovation, where audits, testing, transparency rules, and other safeguards can be tried and improved. They argue that successful state frameworks can become national models and help shape broader standards without stopping innovation.

While we have been very clear that the federal government remains well-positioned to lead on frontier safety because it has the resources, expertise and institutions, we also strongly actually see a position for both Illinois but also California and New York to really lead in adv…

Caitlin Niedermeyer · Jul 7, 2026 · full quote
SB 315 passed with overwhelming bi-partisan support because lawmakers recognize the same basic truth: the public demands safety and transparency from the AI companies shaping their future. Illinois has created a new template for responsible AI governance that we expect other stat…

Steve Wimmer · Jul 6, 2026 · full quote
Good AI policy requires independent verification of safety. AB 1405 will take a significant step in creating the ecosystem for independent verification to become a reality. By working in concert with Sen. McNerney we are building a framework where California leads the way in crea…

Rebecca Bauer-Kahan · Jun 17, 2026 · full quote
States can and should experiment with regulation, standard-setting, public-private partnerships, public goals–conditioned funding, and other efforts to protect their citizens from AI’s downsides and ensure they capture its upsides.

Alondra Nelson · 2026 · full quote
Governor Pritzker and the Illinois legislature are courageously supporting stronger safeguards to oversee powerful AI. Illinois is the first state to mandate independent third-party evaluations of AI safety practices, making its AI law the strongest in the country.

Nick Beckstead · Jul 6, 2026 · full quote
This represents an important consumer safety check on a growing industry that has intimate access to our personal information. I’m proud of the work the sponsors have done to set a standard for safety, responsibility and transparency that I hope serves as a national model.

Don Harmon · Jul 6, 2026 · full quote

Arguments against

Patchwork compliance burdens

Opponents argue that letting states set their own stricter standards would create a patchwork of inconsistent rules, definitions, and reporting demands across the country. They say this would raise compliance costs, especially for multistate firms and startups, and deny businesses one clear rulebook.

The FRONTIER Act is a targeted bill with clear, uniform transparency, and safety standards, instead of a fifty-state patchwork. I'm glad to support this bipartisan effort so that Congress acts before this technology outruns us.

Scott Peters · Jul 23, 2026 · full quote
At the same time, some states and localities are moving ahead independently with their own AI regulations. New York, California, Colorado, and others have begun implementing policies intended to address privacy, discrimination, and other workforce concerns. However, some have rai…

Ryan Mackenzie · Apr 15, 2026 · full quote
Congress has an opportunity to foster this innovation by adopting a regulatory approach that is careful, deliberate, and grounded in the realities of wage and hour compliance. That means resisting the temptation to impose prescriptive mandates that would stifle the development an…

Matthew Gizzo · Apr 15, 2026 · full quote
Creating a patchwork of AI laws where 50 different states all have different goals is ultimately going to hurt little tech and startups more than anyone else.

Michael Kratsios · 2026 · full quote
If you have to report to 50 different state regulators at 50 different times with 50 different definitions, it's extremely onerous. And it's going to slow down innovation, and it's going to hinder our progress in the AI race.

David Sacks · 2025 · full quote
The United States cannot remain competitive if developers, businesses, and users face fifty different legal regimes governing a general-purpose technology. [...] Congress should take this recommendation seriously and establish a light-touch national framework that preserves room …

Daniel Castro · 2026 · full quote

National competitiveness

Another argument is that fragmented state regulation would weaken American innovation and make it harder for the United States to lead in the global AI race. On this view, a uniform national framework is needed to protect competitiveness, keep innovation at home, and avoid burdening firms with fifty different legal regimes.

America should lead the world in artificial intelligence, not regulate ourselves into falling behind China through a patchwork of fifty different state laws.

Erin Houchin · Jun 4, 2026 · full quote
“Like it or not, artificial intelligence is here to stay. The U.S. can choose to lead the world in this transformative technology or we can regulate it into the hands of Communist China. If we care about American jobs, national security and staying ahead of our foreign adversarie…

Gabe Evans · Feb 19, 2026 · full quote
“Artificial intelligence is already transforming economies across the globe, and it’s not going away. The question is not whether AI will shape the future, it’s who will set the standards that govern its development and use. The United States is best positioned to establish stron…

Nick Langworthy · Feb 19, 2026 · full quote
Importantly, this framework can succeed only if it is applied uniformly across the United States. A patchwork of conflicting state laws would undermine American innovation and our ability to lead in the global AI race.

The White House · Mar 20, 2026 · full quote
Preempting state AI laws would prevent regulatory fragmentation and enable the innovation America needs to compete in the global AI race, while allowing existing laws and regulations that are flexible enough to govern AI effectively to continue to do so.

Ash Johnson · Jun 10, 2026 · full quote
In December, President Trump signed an Executive Order [...] “One Rulebook.” This was in response to a growing patchwork [...] America's lead in the AI race.

David Sacks · Mar 20, 2026 · full quote

Federal rulemaking role

Several critics say Congress or the federal government should set the rules of the road for AI, rather than leaving stricter standards to the states. They present national standards as the best way to pair safety and transparency with consistent governance.

"Artificial intelligence is already transforming our economy, our national security and the way Americans live and work," said Congressman Scott Franklin (FL-18). " Congress has a responsibility to establish clear rules of the road that encourage innovation while ensuring this te…

Scott Franklin · Jun 4, 2026 · full quote
Instead of pushing AI amnesty, President Trump rightfully called on Congress to pass federal standards and protections to solve the patchwork of state laws that has hindered AI innovation. Now, Congress must answer his call to establish one federal rulebook for AI to protect chil…

Marsha Blackburn · Mar 18, 2026 · full quote
“There’s no doubt that AI is rapidly transforming how we live and work. The question now is whether America develops the rules of the road and leads the future of this extremely powerful tool, or if we let adversaries like China set the terms,” Fedorchak said. “It cannot be the l…

Julie Fedorchak · Mar 20, 2026 · full quote
Congress should strongly consider enacting a national standard that streamlines compliance and expressly preempts conflicting state and local frameworks.

Bradford J. Kelley · Feb 3, 2026 · full quote
If safety is the priority, such a national standard is the best policy approach to ensure the US continues to lead in innovation and not be undermined by a patchwork of regulations.

OpenAI · Jul 15, 2026 · full quote
Rather than allow protections to exist in only a handful of states or force innovators to navigate dozens of different legal regimes, our framework would establish one national standard.

Jay Obernolte · 2026 · full quote

Risk of flawed mandates

Some opponents warn that state laws can impose subjective, ideological, or overly prescriptive requirements without clear national standards or certifications. From this perspective, standalone state frameworks may burden companies without clear safety benefits and may invite anti-competitive rules while the technology is still poorly understood.

Some state laws seek to impose their own patchwork of regulations on AI. Colorado’s Artificial Intelligence Act, for instance, appears to coerce companies into altering the output of their AI models to comply with and advance the state’s ideological objectives.

Federal Trade Commission (FTC) · Jul 7, 2026 · full quote
Colorado’s Artificial Intelligence Act, for instance, appears to coerce companies into altering the output of their AI models to comply with and advance the state’s ideological objectives.

Andrew N. Ferguson · Jul 1, 2026 · full quote
We remain concerned that Illinois would effectively be requiring private actors to make highly subjective determinations requiring AI safety compliance without established national standards, certifications, or clear regulatory guardrails.

Ninia Linero · May 20, 2026 · full quote
[The bill] would create a standalone state framework that increases compliance burdens without delivering clear safety benefits.

Tom Mann · Feb 10, 2026 · full quote
I'm disappointed [the Big Beautiful Bill] didn't include a proposed moratorium on U.S. state-level AI regulation. While there is a role for AI regulation, it is when the technology is new and poorly understood that lobbyists are most likely to succeed at pushing through anti-comp…

Andrew Ng · 2026 · full quote
States should check their regulatory impulses and adopt the federal approach of accelerating better development and faster deployment of this general-purpose technology.

Nate Karren · Jan 30, 2026 · full quote

Middle ground

Federal baseline, state flexibility

Some quotes propose a hybrid approach in which the federal government sets baseline standards in areas such as security, privacy, civil rights, transparency, or frontier safety, while states keep authority over implementation, deployment, and harms not adequately covered nationally. In this view, preemption should be narrow or tied to a genuinely stronger federal substitute, not applied broadly across all state AI laws.

The federal government should establish baseline national standards for areas such as security, privacy, civil rights, transparency, and interstate consistency. States should retain flexibility to address implementation, public sector use, and issues unique to their citizens and …

Robert Fulk · Jul 2026 · full quote
While we have been very clear that the federal government remains well-positioned to lead on frontier safety because it has the resources, expertise and institutions, we also strongly actually see a position for both Illinois but also California and New York to really lead in adv…

Caitlin Niedermeyer · Jul 7, 2026 · full quote
States, meanwhile, would retain full power to govern how AI is deployed and used, from hiring and housing to health care, education, chatbots, and more.

Lori Trahan · Jun 12, 2026 · full quote
Federal preemption of state AI laws should proceed on a narrow, issue-by-issue basis. Broad preemption of a vaguely defined and poorly understood category of state laws would, in all likelihood, be a disaster, for both political and policy reasons.

Charlie Bullock · Jul 8, 2026 · full quote
Today, the White House released its AI framework which broadly blocks state AI laws and lacks key consumer protections around AI models and agent safety. [...] Preemption only makes sense if federal law effectively replaces what states have built with a standard that meets higher…

Josh Gottheimer · 2026 · full quote

The debate centers on whether the larger danger is a federal gap in protections or a fragmented landscape of state-by-state rules. Supporters of stronger state authority stress immediate public harms and the need for states to act when national safeguards are weak, while opponents emphasize uniformity, compliance simplicity, and national competitiveness. Several quotes point to possible compromise through a federal baseline combined with narrower preemption and continued state room to address local uses or uncovered risks.

Cast your vote:

Results (111 votes):

Total (111 votes)

For 82 (74%) Abstain 0 (0%) Against 29 (26%)

For (82)

Karen E. Spilka
President of the Massachusetts Senate.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Today the Senate took action to maintain the Commonwealth’s economic edge while giving Massachusetts residents, families, and businesses the best bet at success.
AI Verified source (Jul 23, 2026)

added 20d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Chris Lehane
OpenAI chief global affairs officer

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

State laws will not all be identical, and we look forward to working with policymakers across the country to ensure they strengthen safety while maximizing AI’s economic benefits.
AI Verified source (Jul 15, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Charlie Bullock
Senior Research Fellow at the Institute for Law & AI, advising policymakers on AI governance and legal policy.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Federal preemption of state AI laws should proceed on a narrow, issue-by-issue basis. Broad preemption of a vaguely defined and poorly understood category of state laws would, in all likelihood, be a disaster, for both political and policy reasons.
AI Verified source (Jul 8, 2026)

added 22d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Government of Brazil
National government of Brazil, speaking through its delegation at the UN Global Dialogue on AI Governance in July 2026.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Interoperability should not be confused with regulatory uniformity. The compatibility of governance-free approaches should enable dialogue among different national policy frameworks. It should not restrict the right of states to adopt their own regul...
more AI Verified source (Jul 7, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Rachel Ventura
Illinois State Senator representing the 43rd District; co-sponsor of the Illinois Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

With the rise of Artificial Intelligence in all aspects of our lives, coupled with the lack of oversight, we face a looming crisis. This legislation sets a strong precedent to ensure AI developers abide by important safety standards and transparency ...
more AI Verified source (Jul 7, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Caitlin Niedermeyer
Global Affairs representative at OpenAI, working on artificial intelligence policy and governance.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

While we have been very clear that the federal government remains well-positioned to lead on frontier safety because it has the resources, expertise and institutions, we also strongly actually see a position for both Illinois but also California and ...
more AI Verified source (Jul 7, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Emanuel "Chris" Welch
Speaker of the Illinois House of Representatives.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

The advancements we’ve seen in just the past few years show the tremendous potential that new technology has to transform our economy, remove barriers, and create opportunity—but it also raises critical questions about everything from safety, to our ...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Sunny Gandhi
Encode AI political affairs VP

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

SB 315 is the strongest AI safety law in the country. It builds on the frameworks California and New York have already passed and goes one step further by requiring independent audits, so the public doesn’t have to take AI companies at their word. Il...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Nick Beckstead
CEO of the Secure AI Project; advocate for AI safety policy and evaluation standards.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Governor Pritzker and the Illinois legislature are courageously supporting stronger safeguards to oversee powerful AI. Illinois is the first state to mandate independent third-party evaluations of AI safety practices, making its AI law the strongest ...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Mary Edly-Allen
Illinois State Senator (D-Libertyville); lead sponsor of SB 315, a frontier AI safety and transparency bill requiring independent third-party audits of major AI developers

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

This bipartisan law is about putting responsible safeguards in place before a preventable catastrophe occurs. Illinois has an opportunity to lead the nation by setting clear expectations for transparency, accountability and public safety. While artif...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Steve Wimmer
Senior Technical and Policy Advisor at Transparency Coalition; advocates accountable AI governance and state leadership.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

SB 315 passed with overwhelming bi-partisan support because lawmakers recognize the same basic truth: the public demands safety and transparency from the AI companies shaping their future. Illinois has created a new template for responsible AI govern...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Daniel Didech
Illinois State Representative (Democrat); lead House sponsor of SB 315, the Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

The pace of AI development and the capabilities of frontier models are accelerating, and the General Assembly has an obligation to ensure that Illinois residents are protected from catastrophic outcomes. This legislation puts enforceable guardrails i...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Don Harmon
President of the Illinois Senate; backs state AI safety, responsibility, and transparency standards.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

This represents an important consumer safety check on a growing industry that has intimate access to our personal information. I’m proud of the work the sponsors have done to set a standard for safety, responsibility and transparency that I hope serv...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Kwame Raoul
Attorney General of Illinois; supports state AI guardrails and transparency in the absence of federal oversight.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Frontier model AI systems have the potential to be used for many good things. However, due to their massive computing power, they also could cause catastrophic events, such as cyberattacks or the system evading control by developers or users. In the ...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Juliana Stratton
Lieutenant Governor of Illinois; advocates responsible AI safeguards and public accountability.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Artificial intelligence is creating incredible opportunities, but it also brings new risks, especially for young people. Illinois is showing that innovation and accountability can go hand in hand by setting clear expectations that help protect our co...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
JB Pritzker
Governor of Illinois; signed the Artificial Intelligence Safety Measures Act in 2026.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

As AI systems become more powerful and the federal government is unwilling to step in, states have a responsibility to protect our people from the dangers of AI while still harnessing the unique potential of the technology. People want protections fr...
more AI Verified source (Jul 6, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Robert Fulk
Indiana Secretary of State official discussing AI governance and state regulatory authority.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

The federal government should establish baseline national standards for areas such as security, privacy, civil rights, transparency, and interstate consistency. States should retain flexibility to address implementation, public sector use, and issues...
more AI Verified source (Jul 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Xavier de Souza Briggs
Senior Fellow at Brookings Metro, researching economic mobility, cities, and AI's workforce impacts.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Building on human-in-command rules, for now state by state and mainly as safety-driven technology policy that doubles as a brake on job automation, to advance “pro-worker AI” steers more broadly and ambitiously.
AI Verified source (Jun 29, 2026)

added 20d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Rebecca Bauer-Kahan
California State Assembly member

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

Good AI policy requires independent verification of safety. AB 1405 will take a significant step in creating the ecosystem for independent verification to become a reality. By working in concert with Sen. McNerney we are building a framework where Ca...
more AI Verified source (Jun 17, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Jerry McNerney
California state senator

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

AI has tremendous potential to improve our lives, but without sufficient guardrails, it also poses significant risks. Under SB 813, California will become the first state to create voluntary standards for the responsible development of AI. I’m also p...
more AI Verified source (Jun 17, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
State Lawmakers Letter: GAAIA State AI Law Preemption
Bipartisan June 2026 collective letter by U.S. state lawmakers opposing federal preemption of state AI laws.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

As state lawmakers, we take seriously our responsibility to safeguard our constituents from AI harms to children, workers, artists and creators, families, and consumers. GAAIA’s broad preemption provisions would freeze a sweeping set of state laws an...
more AI Verified source (Jun 16, 2026)

added 22d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Lori Trahan
U.S. representative from Massachusetts

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

States, meanwhile, would retain full power to govern how AI is deployed and used, from hiring and housing to health care, education, chatbots, and more.
AI Verified source (Jun 12, 2026)

added 2mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU)
US civil liberties advocacy organization

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

The federal government must not grant tech giants a blank check to deploy these technologies without the oversight of states.
AI Verified source (Jun 4, 2026)

added 22d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Nicholas Garcia
Senior Policy Counsel at Public Knowledge, working on technology policy and AI governance.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

The sweeping preemption clause in this bill goes far beyond replacing state laws that might conflict or duplicate this federal framework. It locks states out of even simple, light-touch transparency and evaluation regulations for other kinds of harms...
more AI Verified source (Jun 4, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Jina John
Senior Policy Counsel for AI, Privacy and Technology at the ACLU.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes For and says:

States must be able to protect their own residents from harm, hold tech companies accountable, and ensure that AI is safe and trustworthy.
AI Verified source (Jun 4, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate

Abstain (0)

Against (28)

Scott Peters
U.S. Representative from California's 50th congressional district; co-sponsor of the FRONTIER Act.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

The FRONTIER Act is a targeted bill with clear, uniform transparency, and safety standards, instead of a fifty-state patchwork. I'm glad to support this bipartisan effort so that Congress acts before this technology outruns us.
AI Verified source (Jul 23, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Federal Trade Commission (FTC)
US consumer protection agency

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

Some state laws seek to impose their own patchwork of regulations on AI. Colorado’s Artificial Intelligence Act, for instance, appears to coerce companies into altering the output of their AI models to comply with and advance the state’s ideological ...
more AI Verified source (Jul 7, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Andrew N. Ferguson
Chairman of the U.S. Federal Trade Commission.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

Colorado’s Artificial Intelligence Act, for instance, appears to coerce companies into altering the output of their AI models to comply with and advance the state’s ideological objectives.
AI Verified source (Jul 1, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Andrew R. Garbarino
U.S. Representative from New York and Chair of the House Homeland Security Committee.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

I think federal pre-emption is something that should be part of it.
AI Verified source (Jun 28, 2026)

added 16d ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate
Ash Johnson
Senior Policy Manager at the Information Technology and Innovation Foundation, focusing on technology policy.

I am this person! Add a sourced quote Report comment

votes Against and says:

Preempting state AI laws would prevent regulatory fragmentation and enable the innovation America needs to compete in the global AI race, while allowing existing laws and regulations that are flexible enough to govern AI effectively to continue to do...
more AI Verified source (Jun 10, 2026)

added 1mo ago

Choose a list of delegates

to vote as the majority of them.

Unless you vote directly.

Delegate

Loading more opinions...

More h/ai-safety votes

AI poses an existential threat to humanity

AI value alignment must be subject to public deliberation, not decided by developers alone

Require open source AI models to include safety benchmarks in release notes

Require large datacenters to install kill switches for AI containment

Pausing AI at human-genius level to solve alignment is safer than either racing to superintelligence or halting entirely

Back