Spurred to action by tech industry lobbyists and insiders, Republicans in the Senate appear to be planning to add language to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) that would preempt states from passing laws regulating AI labs.

Two sources with knowledge tell Fast Company that a small group of GOP lawmakers, staffers, and tech lobbyists worked through the weekend crafting the new language.

Heading into Thanksgiving,much uncertainty hangs over the fate of the state-level moratorium – and a fair amount of secrecy about how the AI industry and its MAGA allies will try to tie the hands of states,and Congress,to regulate AI. Democrats and others may not be allowed to see the new language until the vote to pass or reject the NDAA, a so-called “must-pass” bill that funds the military.

Senate Democrats also have no visibility on the scope of the moratorium language that will go in the NDAA. Could it, for example, prevent states from passing any and all kinds of AI laws, including those that focus on consumer protection issues or AI-related unemployment?

“What big tech is trying to do here is an even larger giveaway than Section 230,” says Future of Life Institute’s head of U.S. policy Michael Kleinman. (Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996 exempted tech platforms from liability for user-generated content.) “You literally have big tech lobbyists meeting with a handful of senior Republicans trying over the course of a holiday weekend to craft legislation that will govern what state governments can do around AI for the future-it’s appalling.”

Not long after louisiana Republican Steve Scalise, the house Majority Leader, introduced the preemption measure last week, Massachusetts Democratic Senators Elizabeth Warren and Ed Markey quickly penned and sent a letter to their colleagues urging them to oppose adding the state moratorium – which they describe as a “poison pill” – to the NDAA,which will need 60 GOP votes to end a Democratic filibuster and advance to a final vote. Attorneys General representing 36 states sent a letter to Congressional leadership opposing the state moratorium language.

Congress is not in session because of the Thanksgiving holiday. But Republicans plan to make another push to convince lawmakers to add the state preemption to the NDAA when they return December 1, sources say.

Last week, the White House proposed a route that bypasses congress, circulating a draft executive order (EO) that proposes pulling back congressionally approved broadband funding from any state enacting new AI laws. The EO also proposed creating a new Department of Justice task force to challenge existing state AI laws. The White House had reportedly planned to release the EO last Friday, but chose to delay it.

Many of the people who would benefit from a state AI moratorium were present at a November 18 White House.

AI and the States

Innovation versus states’ rights

Many state governors, including Florida Republican Ron DeSantis, and legislators claim they have not just a right but a responsibility to enact AI laws to protect the public in the absence of a federal law. State lawmakers are very aware of the series of reports about AI chatbots making mental health problems worse for users, including younger ones. “There’s a big concern that state legislators can’t protect kids from some of the harms of AI,” Kemp says.

On monday, a bipartisan group of 280 state lawmakers from across the country sent a letter to Congress urging them to pass federal AI legislation. They argue that a national standard is needed to avoid a confusing patchwork of state laws that could stifle innovation.

Though, some tech companies aren’t waiting for federal action. They’re already challenging state laws in court. For example, a coalition of tech groups is suing California over its new law requiring AI companies to disclose when AI is used to generate content. They claim the law violates the Frist Amendment.

The debate over AI regulation highlights a long-standing tension between states’ rights and the need for national standards, especially when it comes to rapidly evolving technologies. It’s a fight that’s likely to continue for some time.