this post was submitted on 26 Nov 2025
100 points (96.3% liked)

Technology

78438 readers
3169 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
L3s@lemmy.world
enu@lemmy.world
technopagan@lemmy.world
L4s@lemmy.world
L3s@hackingne.ws
100
What the leaked AI executive order tells us about the Big Tech power grab (www.theverge.com)
submitted 1 month ago by tonytins@pawb.social to c/technology@lemmy.world
7 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Last week, I was following up on several rumors that Donald Trump would sign an executive order that would fulfill a longstanding goal of the AI industry: legal preemption that would prevent states from passing their own AI laws. Mostly, I was calling sources trying to get a sense of how the Trump administration planned to approach it: Which agency would be spearheading it? What legal arguments would they use? How would it interact with Congress, which was trying to pass a similar moratorium in the National Defense Authorization Act?

And then I got a copy of the draft order itself — possibly a sign that someone in the administration deeply, deeply loathes David Sacks, Trump’s Special Advisor on AI and Crypto. Even though he’s not a permanent government employee — he is, in fact, a billionaire tech venture capitalist with a provisional employment status similar to the one Elon Musk previously held — Sacks has become deeply influential in setting the administration’s AI and crypto policies. (Just look at Trump’s recent statements about federal AI preemption.)

Archive: http://archive.today/SK68Z

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] IWW4@lemmy.zip 29 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (3 children)

An EO can prevent states from passing laws?

I find that hard to believe.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 14 points 1 month ago (1 children)

An EO can prevent states from passing laws?

Federal laws and regulations preempt state laws and regulations.

An EO by itself cannot prevent states from passing laws. The President doesn't make laws.

What he can do is choose an interpretation of an existing law which creates a federal regulation on AI (likely through the FCC), preventing states from regulating them.

[–] DomeGuy@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

He can try.

Each of the fifty states literally has its own legal system, which are as a rule very particular about the separation of powers.

If Trump signs an EO directing the FCC to declare AI a."telecommunications" product.that states aren't allowed to regulate, there'd be that same week ten to fifty lawsuits by the states asserting that the EO was unconstitutional and had zero effect.

What the AI oligarchs want is for the FCC to decide this on their own without an EO, or for Congress to pass a law. (Although Scotus has made noises about lifting what can be done without Congress in other areas ...)

[–] muusemuuse@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 month ago

Short answer: no

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 0 points 1 month ago

In theory: no.

In practice: spineless fuckers like Gavin Newsom will follow through it, save for doing some bare-minimum pornographic deepfake bans the corporations will agree on, and will still allow non-pornographic deepfakes.