Date saved: 2026-10-24 03:01 (PDT)
Sources: Bloomberg Law, Faegre Drinker, Inside Global Tech, Morgan Lewis, USA Today, Amazing Golden History
Key findings
Federal retreat, state surge
- Bloomberg Law (2026): Despite warnings from AI companies about safety and security risks of new models, the Trump administration has signaled a hands-off approach to AI regulation. Attorney General Todd Blanche has stated the DOJ will not impose new regulatory burdens on the AI industry through standalone enforcement actions. But companies still face legal risk at the state level through legislation and enforcement actions. California's Transparency in Frontier AI Act took effect earlier this year, requiring large developers of frontier models to publish information about training datasets, safety frameworks, and risk assessments, with penalties up to $1 million per violation. (Source)
- Faegre Drinker (2026): On September 18, 2026, California Governor Gavin Newsom issued an executive order accelerating two AI oversight laws he signed earlier that month. The order moved the deadline for publishing criteria for certifying independent verification organizations under SB 813 to May 1, 2027, and the deadline for the state registry and standards for AI auditors under AB 1405 to December 1, 2027. New York's RAISE Act requires large frontier AI developers to publish safety and transparency frameworks, report critical safety incidents within 72 hours, and file quarterly catastrophic-risk assessments. (Source)
Trump's Super Intelligence rebrand and industry accord
- Inside Global Tech (2026): On September 29, President Trump issued Executive Order 14434, 'Inaugurating the Era of Super Intelligence,' directing the executive branch to replace the term 'Artificial Intelligence' with 'Super Intelligence' in official usage. The same day, Trump announced a White House Accord titled 'Joint Commitment on Frontier Responsibilities,' signed by Google, Anthropic, Meta, OpenAI, XAI, and Nvidia. The participating companies agreed to implement controls and audits and to meet regularly to establish safety standards. Separately, the House passed the Ratepayer Protection Act, a bipartisan bill requiring data center operators to bear infrastructure costs rather than shifting them to ratepayers. (Source)
State enforcement actions against AI companies
- Bloomberg Law (2026): Pennsylvania's Attorney General Dave Sunday initiated an enforcement action against an operator of a chatbot for falsely representing itself as a licensed psychiatrist in violation of the Pennsylvania Medical Practice Act. Florida's Attorney General James Uthmeier opened a criminal investigation into OpenAI's ChatGPT after the chatbot allegedly offered advice to a gunman who killed two people on Florida State University's campus last year. Illinois mandates annual independent third-party audits of safety practices. Connecticut requires any business using automated tools in employment decisions to document bias testing and provide pre-use notices to workers. (Source)
Public opinion and industry lobbying
- Amazing Golden History (2026): A documentary on AI safety and regulation reported that 73 percent of Americans say AI companies are not doing enough to protect society from AI risks. Ninety-seven percent agree AI safety and security must be subject to government rules and regulations. Eighty-six percent want a guaranteed AI off switch. The tech industry is pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into pro-AI super PACs, with the main goal of lobbying Congress to preempt state-level AI regulation. Fifty-seven percent of voters oppose congressional efforts to block states from regulating AI. (Source)
- USA Today (2026): A USA Today segment on AI regulation featured AI Now Institute Co-Executive Director Sarah Myers West discussing the risks consumers already face, the limits of the current federal approach, and what meaningful U.S. oversight could look like. The report noted that while the European Union has adopted a sweeping regulatory framework, the U.S. still has no single federal rulebook governing the technology, relying instead on a patchwork of state laws, voluntary industry standards, and lawsuits after something goes wrong. (Source)
Artificial intelligence regulation in 2026 is a story of two countries pulling in opposite directions. The European Union has built a comprehensive legal framework and is now enforcing it. The United States has a patchwork of state laws moving forward while the Trump administration has explicitly declined to use federal enforcement against AI companies. The gap between those two approaches is now shaping where AI companies build, how they design their systems, and which rules they actually have to follow.
At the federal level, the Trump administration has opted for voluntary industry self-regulation. The Department of Justice under Attorney General Todd Blanche has stated it will not impose new regulatory burdens on the AI industry through standalone enforcement actions. Trump issued an executive order in late September rebranding AI as 'Super Intelligence' and announced a White House Accord signed by Google, Anthropic, Meta, OpenAI, XAI, and Nvidia that commits the companies to implementing controls and audits. The accord is not a law. It is a handshake. And the enforcement story is happening at the state level instead.
The state-level action is where the real regulatory teeth are. California's Transparency in Frontier AI Act took effect earlier this year with penalties up to $1 million per violation. New York, Illinois, and Connecticut have followed with similar laws, and Illinois goes further by mandating annual independent third-party audits. Pennsylvania's attorney general has opened an enforcement action against a chatbot operator for falsely representing itself as a licensed psychiatrist. Florida's attorney general has opened a criminal investigation into OpenAI's ChatGPT after the chatbot allegedly offered advice to a gunman who killed two people on a university campus. The industry is pouring money into lobbying to preempt state laws, but polling shows most Americans want the opposite.
Source links
- Bloomberg Law: DOJ's Retreat on AI Enforcement Puts Focus on State Regulators
- Faegre Drinker: Global and Domestic Policymakers Struggle to Keep Pace with AI Advancement
- Inside Global Tech: U.S. Tech Legislative and Regulatory Update - Third Quarter 2026
- Morgan Lewis: The New Rules of AI - A Global Legal Overview, May 2026
- YouTube: 73% Say AI Companies Aren't Doing Enough - What Happens Next?
- YouTube: Can the US regulate AI without slowing innovation? | The Excerpt | USA TODAY