Trump’s AI Executive Order Sparks Potential Conflict with Wisconsin
The recent executive order from President Donald Trump, which seeks to curtail state-level AI regulations, has stirred a potential confrontation with Wisconsin’s governor, Tony Evers. The governor expressed concerns that the order could compromise the safety of children and families in the state.
Signed on December 11, the executive order prohibits states from establishing their own AI regulations, arguing that a unified national standard is necessary to avoid stifling innovation across the technology sector.
“My Administration must act with the Congress to ensure that there is a minimally burdensome national standard — not 50 discordant State ones,” President Trump stated in the order.
To enforce this directive, the order establishes an AI Litigation Task Force tasked with challenging state laws that do not align with federal AI policy. It also threatens to withhold federal funding from non-compliant states.
In response, Governor Evers sent a letter to President Trump urging him to reconsider any actions that would undermine state efforts to establish AI-related policies. Evers highlighted the potential risks AI poses, particularly to children, and referenced specific state laws designed to mitigate these risks.
These laws include requirements for disclosing AI-generated content in political ads, amendments to laws against child exploitation to cover AI-generated material, and a felony charge for sharing non-consensual AI-generated explicit images.
Governor Evers warned, “To be clear: if you, your administration, or Congressional Republicans make any attempt to preempt state laws like Wisconsin’s that create basic, common-sense AI safeguards, you will be making kids and families in Wisconsin less safe from dangerous and malicious misuses of AI.”
The Trump administration contends that national leadership in AI is crucial, arguing that state-by-state regulation could hinder interstate commerce. However, Wisconsin Attorney General Josh Kaul suggested that the federal government cannot unilaterally prevent states from enacting laws, highlighting the importance of balancing AI innovation with public safety.
Kaul remarked, “The president can’t unilaterally prevent states from enacting laws. That’s not how our system of government works.” Additionally, he expressed concerns about AI regulation benefiting large tech corporations at the expense of public safety and innovation.
Earlier, a legislative committee in Wisconsin recommended precise AI regulation at the state level, advocating for targeted measures and increased education on AI.
Sandra Bradley from the University of Wisconsin-Madison emphasized the necessity of inclusive AI regulation. She noted, “If we have the right kind of regulation, I think it’s going to give us good guardrails.” Bradley stressed the importance of involving states and smaller businesses in shaping AI policies.
According to Bradley, “I feel like those (national) frameworks kind of favor scale over what actually works in the real world,” emphasizing the practical role states play in AI regulation.
