Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence
Executive Order 14365, titled "Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence," was signed by President Donald Trump on December 11, 2025, and published in the Federal Register on December 16, 2025 (Doc. No. 2025-23092, pages 58499–58501).[1] The order established federal policy to promote a nationally uniform, minimally burdensome regulatory framework for AI and directed multiple federal agencies to challenge state AI laws deemed inconsistent with that framework. It is the most consequential of the Trump administration's AI executive orders for state-federal regulatory relations.
The order has spawned multiple downstream actions tracked elsewhere on this wiki, including the DOJ AI Litigation Task Force, the Commerce Department State AI Laws Assessment, and the FTC AI Policy Statement.
BackgroundEdit
By late 2025, numerous states had enacted or were advancing comprehensive AI regulation, including risk-based frameworks (Colorado SB 24-205), consumer protection statutes (Texas, Utah), and sector-specific requirements (California). The Trump administration characterized this patchwork as a threat to U.S. AI competitiveness, arguing that a fragmented multi-state regulatory environment would impose compliance costs on AI developers and slow the pace of innovation.[2]
The order also reflected the administration's competitive framing of AI policy: that China was advancing rapidly in AI and that U.S. state-level regulatory friction threatened American dominance in what the administration described as "the defining technology of the century."
Key ProvisionsEdit
Policy StatementEdit
The order declares it is the policy of the United States to "sustain and enhance the United States' global AI dominance through a minimally burdensome national policy framework for AI." The administration asserted this policy as the basis for federal authority to challenge state laws inconsistent with that objective.
DOJ AI Litigation Task ForceEdit
The order directed the Department of Justice to establish an AI Litigation Task Force to identify and challenge in court state AI laws that the administration deemed inconsistent with the federal policy statement, on grounds including conflict preemption, field preemption, and Commerce Clause violations. The Task Force was established in January 2026.[3]
Commerce Department State-Law AssessmentEdit
The Department of Commerce was directed to evaluate state AI laws and identify those posing the greatest threat to national AI policy objectives. The resulting assessment, released in March 2026, flagged specific state statutes for DOJ Task Force referral.
FTC AI Policy StatementEdit
The Federal Trade Commission was directed to issue a policy statement addressing how the FTC Act applies to AI models and identifying circumstances in which state AI laws requiring alterations to truthful AI outputs are preempted by federal law. The FTC issued this statement in March 2026.
FCC ProceedingEdit
The Federal Communications Commission was directed to initiate a proceeding to consider whether a federal reporting and disclosure standard for AI models should be established, which could serve as the basis for preemption of more onerous state disclosure requirements.
Federal Funding ConditionsEdit
The order directed executive departments and agencies to assess their discretionary grant programs and determine whether grants to states could be conditioned on a state either not enacting AI laws conflicting with the federal policy statement, or entering into binding agreements not to enforce conflicting laws during the grant performance period. The order explicitly invoked the BEAD Program (Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment) as a potential leverage point.[4]
Carveouts for State AuthorityEdit
The order preserved state regulatory authority in three specific areas, explicitly exempting them from the federal preemption push:
- Child safety regulations relating to AI
- State government infrastructure development programs
- State government AI procurement[5]
Downstream Agency ActionsEdit
The order generated a cluster of federal actions in the first months of 2026:
- January 2026 — DOJ AI Litigation Task Force formally established
- March 2026 — Commerce Department released its state AI laws assessment
- March 2026 — FTC issued its AI Policy Statement
- April 2026 — DOJ intervened in xAI v. Weiser (challenge to Colorado SB 24-205), escalating to a formal party in the litigation (May 2026)
Legal and Constitutional AnalysisEdit
Legal commentators debated whether the executive order's preemption strategy had a sound constitutional basis. Because Congress had not enacted comprehensive federal AI legislation, there was no statutory basis for field preemption of state AI law. The administration's approach relied primarily on assertions of conflict preemption — that specific state AI requirements conflict with the federal government's ability to pursue its AI policy objectives — and on the spending power conditions approach authorized by South Dakota v. Dole.[6]
Critics argued that executive policy statements without congressional authorization cannot themselves preempt state law, and that spending-power conditions must be clearly stated in the legislation creating the underlying grant program. Supporters argued the administration had broad discretion to challenge state laws through litigation without requiring statutory preemption authority.
The December 11, 2025 EO was the direct legislative inspiration for the TRUMP AMERICA AI Act introduced by Sen. Blackburn in 2026, which would have codified the preemption policy in statute.[7]