The 90-day clock set by President Trump's December executive order on artificial intelligence runs out today. Two federal agencies, the Department of Commerce and the Federal Trade Commission, face a March 11 deadline to publish documents that would lay the groundwork for challenging state AI laws across the country.
The Commerce Department is required to publish an evaluation identifying state AI laws it considers "onerous" or in conflict with federal policy. The FTC must issue a policy statement explaining how Section 5 of the FTC Act, which prohibits unfair and deceptive practices, applies to AI models, and under what circumstances state laws requiring changes to AI outputs are preempted by federal authority.
Neither document had been published as of this writing.
The executive order, signed December 11, 2025, declared it U.S. policy to achieve "global AI dominance through a minimally burdensome national policy framework for AI." It does not itself preempt, repeal, or invalidate any state law. Instead, it directs a sequenced series of federal actions: agency evaluations, litigation referrals, funding conditions, and rulemaking proceedings designed to pressure states into rolling back AI regulation.
The broadband funding mechanism is the most direct lever. The order directs the Commerce Department to condition approximately $21 billion in remaining Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment program funds on states not maintaining AI laws the administration deems problematic. States with "onerous" laws would lose eligibility for non-deployment funding under the program.
The BEAD Act never mentions artificial intelligence. Legal analysts have questioned whether the statute gives the National Telecommunications and Information Administration authority to impose such conditions. Brian McGrail, policy lead at the Center for AI Safety Action Fund, wrote in Lawfare that the administration's reading "lacks a limiting principle" and that federalism-protecting canons of interpretation favor the states. The major questions doctrine, he said, requires clear congressional authorization before an agency leverages a broadband program to reshape national AI policy.
The FTC component rests on an untested legal theory. The order asks the FTC chairman to explain when state laws requiring AI developers to adjust model outputs to reduce bias are preempted by the federal prohibition on deceptive practices. The implication is that certain state transparency and algorithmic fairness requirements compel outputs that could be deemed "deceptive" under federal law.
On January 9, Attorney General Pam Bondi established a DOJ AI Litigation Task Force to challenge state AI laws in federal court on grounds including unconstitutional burdens on interstate commerce. The Commerce Department's evaluation, once published, would serve as the basis for those referrals. Colorado, California, and New York, each with comprehensive AI regulatory frameworks, have received particular attention in federal policy discussions.
The order does carve out protections. State laws relating to child safety, AI compute and data center infrastructure, and state government procurement and use of AI are expressly shielded from federal preemption.
Ninety days after the Commerce Secretary's evaluation, the Federal Communications Commission must open proceedings on a federal standard for AI model reporting and disclosures that would supersede conflicting state regulations. That timeline places the next phase of the strategy in early June.
