U.S. House of Representatives passes proposal to prohibit enforcement of state AI laws for 10 years

Requirements

The proposed AI moratorium would prohibit states from enforcing any laws or regulations limiting, restricting, or otherwise regulating “artificial intelligence models,” “artificial intelligence systems,” or “automated decision systems,” defined broadly by the Act, for ten years from the date of enactment. In practice, the moratorium could halt enforcement of laws that not only expressly regulate AI, but also those that touch on online safety, age-verification, and the use of algorithms.

The prohibition contains only a few exceptions (characterized as “rules of construction”) for laws or regulations that:

1. Have the primary purpose and effect of removing legal impediments to facilitate the deployment or operation of covered AI models and systems or streamlining licensing, permitting, routing, zoning, procurement, or reporting procedures in a way that facilitates the adoption of covered AI models and systems;
2. Do not impose any substantive design, performance, data-handling, documentation, civil liability, taxation, fee, or other requirement on covered AI models and systems, unless those requirements are imposed by Federal law or are imposed in the same manner on comparable non-AI systems and models; and
3. Do not impose a fee or bond unless it is reasonable and cost-based and treats covered AI models and systems in the same manner as comparable models and systems.

Additionally, the moratorium does not apply to any provision of a law or regulation that carries a criminal penalty.

Debate in committee

The AI moratorium was discussed at length during the markup hearing in the House Committee on Energy and Commerce after Ranking Member Frank Pallone (D-NJ) offered an amendment seeking to strike the provision. Chairman Guthrie (R-KY) and Representatives Obernolte (R-CA) and Lee (R-FL) spoke in favor of federal preemption for AI regulation and emphasized that Congress would work to develop bipartisan federal AI legislation and seek to lift the stay on state enforcement before 10 years.

Several Democrat Committee members spoke against the provision, including Representatives Matsui (D-CA), Castor (D-FL), Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY), and Menendez (D-NJ), who emphasized that states have regulated AI in response to federal inaction, noting the variety of state laws that would be blocked by the moratorium.

The Pallone amendment was defeated along party lines.

Initial responses

Since its introduction, the proposed moratorium has garnered widespread attention. Some commentators have commended the provision, arguing it takes a necessary step in light of the growing patchwork of state AI laws—more than 1,000 AI-related bills have been proposed across states within the first five months of 2025. Some state legislators and state attorneys general, on the other hand, have criticized the provision.

Next steps

Now that the budget bill has been passed by the House of Representatives, it will head to the Senate next as part of the reconciliation process.

Authored by Mark Brennan, Scott Loughlin, Cybil Roehrenbeck, Eduardo Ustaran, Katy Milner, Senator Kyrsten Sinema, Ryan Thompson, and Erin Mizraki.