Last week, U.S. House Energy and Commerce Chairman Brett Guthrie, R-Ky., announced a full committee markup of the committee's budget reconciliation text. Set for Tuesday, 13 May at 2 p.m. ET, a memorandum from the majority staff to committee members and staff, which was published Sunday, 11 May, includes language that could lead to a halt on enforcement of state-level laws related to artificial intelligence systems.
In part 2 (page 9), subsection (c) states that "no state or political subdivision may enforce any law or regulation regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems during the 10-year period beginning on the date of enactment of this Act."
Additional text can be found under section c (page 6), which includes text on the "rule of construction" of the moratorium.
In his press release announcing the full markup, Guthrie said that through the reconciliation process the committee "is working to ... unleash American energy and innovation."
As can be seen in the IAPP's U.S. State AI Governance Legislation Tracker, there is no shortage of AI-related bills across the country.
In a post for Lawfare, Kevin Frazier and Adam Thierer wrote that the proliferation of AI bills "could undermine the nation's efforts to stay at the cutting edge of AI innovation at a critical moment when competition with China for global AI supremacy is intensifying." They call on Congress "to get serious about preemption."
In comments provided to the IAPP, Goodwin Partner Omer Tene said, "There's certainly great concerns in industry about the avalanche of state legislative bills regulating various aspects of AI. If privacy regulation is a patchwork, this is emerging to resemble an artwork comprising microplastics."
It is unclear whether the committee will accept the 10-year moratorium or whether it will face legal challenges. Tene adds that "federal moratoriums are rare and have typically focused on very specific technologies, which are regulated at the federal level (e.g. commercial drones). Here, Congress purports to block regulation of an incredibly broad, all encompassing technology, and to do so absent any semblance of federal regulation."
Tene points to legal precedent. "In my opinion, it's in tension with the Tenth Amendment anti-commandeering principle as applied in Murphy vs. NCAA."
Jedidiah Bracy is the editor director for the IAPP.
This is a developing story.