President Donald Trump’s latest move to shape the future of artificial intelligence in the United States has ignited a fierce debate among business leaders, policymakers, and civil liberties advocates. On Thursday, December 11, 2025, Trump signed an executive order aimed squarely at blocking states from crafting their own regulations for artificial intelligence (AI), arguing that a tangle of state-level rules could stifle innovation and leave the U.S. lagging behind global rivals, especially China.
In a statement from the Oval Office, Trump didn’t mince words about what’s at stake. “There’s only going to be one winner” in the race to dominate AI, he declared, noting that China’s centralized approach gives its companies a clear path for government approvals. “We have the big investment coming, but if they had to get 50 different approvals from 50 different states, you can forget it because it’s impossible to do.” According to Alabama Daily News, the executive order directs the Attorney General to create a new task force to challenge state laws and instructs the Commerce Department to compile a list of problematic regulations. The order also threatens to restrict funding from federal programs—such as broadband deployment grants—to states that maintain their own AI laws.
The business world’s reaction has been anything but uniform. As reported by Fortune, Silicon Valley heavyweights like OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and venture capitalist Marc Andreessen welcomed the executive order. They argue that a unified, minimally burdensome national standard is crucial if America wants to keep pace with China, which is investing heavily in AI and has already launched its own “AI Plus” framework. David Sacks, a venture capitalist with deep AI investments and a key Trump adviser on technology policy, echoed this sentiment, emphasizing that the administration would only push back on “the most onerous examples of state regulation,” while leaving room for “kid safety” measures.
But not everyone is convinced. Seven CEOs from a range of industries—speaking to Fortune on the condition of anonymity—offered more nuanced takes. While none relished the prospect of navigating a patchwork of conflicting state laws (one CEO called it “a race to be the Delaware of AI”), several expressed concern about the legality of Trump’s order and the potential for a regulatory vacuum. “I’m in a state with a lot of regulation and a lot of innovation,” said one California-based CEO. “What matters is resources, talent and technology.” Another executive, this time from the tech sector, summed up the prevailing mood: “I’d rather have less regulation than more regulation, but I’d rather have some regulation than no regulation.”
Legal experts, too, are raising eyebrows. As law firm Fisher Phillips noted in a statement cited by Fortune, “all current and pending state and local AI laws will remain enforceable unless and until a court blocks them through an injunction, or Congress passes a federal law that preempts them.” In other words, Trump’s executive order may not have the sweeping effect he intends—at least, not without judicial or legislative backing. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, which praised the president’s effort to eliminate the patchwork of state laws, nonetheless called on Congress to establish a federal AI framework to “deliver the certainty and stability” companies need to “harness [AI’s] full potential.”
The stakes are high. AI technology already permeates daily life in ways both visible and invisible. It helps decide who gets a job interview, an apartment lease, a home loan, and even certain types of medical care. But as Alabama Daily News pointed out, research has shown that AI can sometimes make discriminatory mistakes—prioritizing one gender or race over another, for example. That’s why some states have taken matters into their own hands. Four states—Colorado, California, Utah, and Texas—have passed laws setting rules for AI across the private sector, including limits on the collection of personal information and requirements for greater transparency from companies about how their AI systems work.
Other states have opted for more targeted approaches. Tennessee’s ELVIS Act, for example, protects individuals from the unauthorized use of AI to mimic their voice and likeness. Texas prohibits the use of AI for unlawful discrimination or sexually explicit content. Colorado requires companies to inform consumers when AI is used for high-stakes decisions like hiring or lending. Even Alabama, which has seen about half a dozen AI-related bills in its legislature in recent years, has taken steps to regulate specific uses of the technology. In 2021, the state created the Council on Advanced Technology and Artificial Intelligence, and in 2022, it passed a law limiting the use of facial recognition technology in criminal investigations—barring it as the sole basis for establishing probable cause or making an arrest.
Despite these efforts, many in the business community say they’re looking for clarity and consistency. Smaller companies, in particular, worry that without federal standards, they’ll be at a disadvantage compared to tech giants with the resources to navigate a maze of state rules. “Rules can level the playing field,” one source told Fortune, “and it’s more expensive to set standards in court.” There’s also concern that if Congress doesn’t act, the U.S. could fall behind other regions with unified approaches—like the European Union, whose Artificial Intelligence Act gives people the right to opt out of having their data used to train AI models, a move some American executives see as stifling innovation.
The international context looms large. China’s President Xi Jinping has proposed creating a World Artificial Intelligence Cooperation Organization (WAICO) to promote global governance of AI. U.S. business leaders argue that America needs to “have a seat at the table” with laws that protect copyright, patents, market access, and consumer protections, while also driving innovation. The fear is that if the U.S. doesn’t move quickly and decisively, it risks ceding leadership in a technology that will shape economies, societies, and security for decades to come.
For now, though, the future of AI regulation in the United States remains uncertain. Trump’s executive order has set the stage for a legal and political showdown over who gets to write the rules for one of the most powerful technologies of the 21st century. Will Congress step in with a comprehensive federal framework? Will the courts uphold or strike down Trump’s attempt to override state authority? And will businesses get the clarity they crave—or be left navigating a regulatory minefield?
As the dust settles, one thing is clear: the debate over how to regulate AI is just beginning, and the outcome will have profound consequences for innovation, competition, and civil rights across the country.
