Instead of a decade-long federal blanket preemption, conservatives can let states act as laboratories for concrete AI harms—fraud, deepfakes, child safety—while resisting abstract, existential-risk bureaucracy. This keeps authority close to voters and avoids 'safetyism' overreach without giving Big Tech a regulatory holiday.
— It reframes AI governance on the right as a federalist, harm-specific strategy rather than libertarian preemption or centralized risk bureaucracies.
EditorDavid
2025.10.04
70% relevant
The article flags that delivery robots’ AI and safety are 'completely unregulated' and deployed without local input. That directly supports a state/local laboratory approach to concrete AI harms (safety, privacy, nuisance) rather than a one‑size federal preemption.
BeauHD
2025.09.29
82% relevant
California’s new law compels major AI companies to reveal safety practices, exemplifying a state‑level approach to governing concrete AI risks rather than waiting for broad federal preemption; it’s already being eyed by Congress and other states as a model.
Brad Littlejohn
2025.08.20
100% relevant
The 'One Big Beautiful Bill' proposal for a ten‑year ban on state AI regulation and the backlash from social conservatives and states’ rights advocates.
← Back to All Ideas