Trump signed an executive order earlier this month aimed at restricting states' ability to regulate AI.
Alex Wong/Getty Images
Trump signed an executive order in December aimed at restricting state-level AI regulation.
It directs the DOJ to sue states for "onerous" AI laws.
It's an issue that's been dividing the GOP since the summer.
President Donald Trump is at odds with several key figures in his party over a hot-button issue: regulation of artificial intelligence.
Trump's AI policy has been broadly friendly toward the industry. He has sought to support the AI infrastructure buildout, and in December, he signed an executive order aimed at restricting states from regulating AI — a policy known as "preemption."
The executive order directs the Department of Justice to set up a litigation task force that will sue states for having "onerous" AI laws, while also raising the prospect of withholding some federal funding from those states.
It's the latest incarnation of previous efforts to block state-level AI regulation in Congress, including in an annual defense bill and in the "Big Beautiful Bill." Both of those efforts failed in large part due to internal GOP opposition.
Trump and other supporters of the policy have argued that in order to win the AI race with China, it's important that tech companies not be forced to comply with 50 different sets of regulations in each state.
David Sacks, a venture capitalist who's also Trump's AI and crypto czar, has said that the order wouldn't force data centers upon communities that don't want them.
Here's what key GOP critics are saying about Trump's AI policy.
Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida
Joe Raedle/Getty Images
Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida — a 2024 GOP primary opponent of Trump's — has been a consistent critic of federal efforts to curtail states' ability to regulate AI.
As lawmakers considered adding an AI regulation moratorium to the annual defense bill in November, DeSantis wrote on X that doing so is a "subsidy to Big Tech."
"The rise of AI is the most significant economic and cultural shift occurring at the moment," DeSantis wrote. "Denying the people the ability to channel these technologies in a productive way via self-government constitutes federal government overreach and lets technology companies run wild."
Following Trump's executive order, DeSantis said at an AI roundtable event in Florida that he was confident that it wouldn't apply to laws that the governor is pursuing in his state.
But he said that if the administration did try to challenge Florida laws, he would expect the state to prevail.
"Even reading it very broadly, I think the stuff we're doing is going to be very consistent," DeSantis said of the executive order. "But irrespective, clearly we have a right to do this."
Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia
Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
As Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene began to break with the president over the summer, one of the issues the Georgia Republican highlighted was AI.
Greene notably admitted to voting for an initial version of the "Big Beautiful Bill" without realizing that it contained a provision to block state AI regulation for AI.
"I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there," Greene wrote on X in June.
Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years.
I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in… pic.twitter.com/bip3hztSGq
— Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene???????? (@RepMTG) June 3, 2025
The Georgia Republican re-upped her criticism when the provision was under consideration for the annual defense bill in November.
"States must retain the right to regulate and make laws on AI and anything else for the benefit of their state," Greene wrote on X. "Federalism must be preserved."
Just days later, Greene announced that she would resign from Congress on January 5 after Trump called her a "traitor," largely over her stance on the Epstein files.
Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri
Tom Williams/CQ Roll Call via Getty Images
Sen. Josh Hawley has been one of the biggest GOP critics of the AI industry in the Senate — and he's opposed efforts to restrict states from regulating the technology.
"I would think that, just as a matter of federalism, we'd want states to be able to try out different regimes that they think will work for their state," Hawley told Business Insider in June. "And I think in general, on AI, I do think we need some sensible oversight that will protect people's liberties."
When the AI provision was reported to be no longer under consideration for the defense bill in November, Hawley celebrated via a post on X.
"Good. This is a terrible provision and should remain OUT," he wrote.
Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders of Arkansas
Andrew Harnik/Getty Images
In June, Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders of Arkansas — who served as the White House Press Secretary during Trump's first term — led a group of 17 Republican governors in opposing an AI moratorium in the "Big Beautiful Bill."
That provision in that bill was stronger than Trump's executive order — it would have amounted to a more wholesale ban on state-level AI regulation for a period of 10 years.
"That Congress proposes to strip away the right of any state to regulate AI is the antithesis of what our founders envisioned when they established our federal system," she wrote in June.
In November, as lawmakers considered adding a similar provision to the defense bill, Sanders spoke up again.
"Now isn't the time to backtrack," she wrote on X. "Drop the preemption plan now and protect our kids and communities."
Gov. Spencer Cox of Utah
Kevin Dietsch/Getty Images
Gov. Spencer Cox of Utah, among the GOP governors who signed onto Sanders' letter, has also remained outspoken against efforts to limit state-level AI regulation.
"I'm very worried about any type of federal incursion into states' abilities to regulate AI," Cox told NPR in November.
In December, as Trump prepared to sign his executive order, Cox said there was a need for more balance.
"An alternative AI executive order focused on human flourishing would strike the balance we need: safeguard our kids, preserve our values, and strengthen American competitiveness," Cox wrote on X. "States must help protect children and families while America accelerates its leadership in AI."