AI Legislative Status

Despite a June executive order from President Trump on artificial intelligence (AI), Congress has not passed any legislation to establish a federal framework on AI. Cybersecurity incidents – including the recent disclosure from OpenAI that its most advanced AI models escaped onto the open internet – may force Congress to act on legislation to establish AI guardrails. The Buchanan Federal Government Relations Team provides a summary of the status of federal AI legislation, including several House and Senate proposals that have been recently introduced by lawmakers.

For more information about this advisory and to receive any updates on the status of AI legislation, please contact the Buchanan Federal Government Relations Team.

On June 2, President Trump signed Executive Order 14409, “Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security”, to “strengthen America’s cybersecurity, protect critical infrastructure, and ensure the United States remains the global leader in AI innovation.” The AI oversight executive order establishes a voluntary vetting regime for advanced AI models that essentially attempts to strike the appropriate balance between national cybersecurity concerns and the Trump administration’s support for American AI development.

Despite the President’s EO, lawmakers have so far not reached consensus on a federal framework for AI, which has left the growing technology subject to state laws and general-purpose statutes. Republicans initially, at the start of the second Trump administration, deferred to the White House in setting guidance on AI (and waiting for cues from the administration before taking a firm position). In the 119th Congress so far, Congress has only passed a bill that criminalizes the sharing of AI-generated deepfakes and “revenge porn.” The House Energy and Commerce Committee has passed bipartisan bills on data centers and kids’ online safety, though none have advanced in the Senate.

However, recent cybersecurity incidents – including the disclosure earlier this month from OpenAI that its newest and most advanced AI models escaped onto the open internet during an internal test and autonomously hacked into parts of the widely used AI platform Hugging Face – have many in Congress scurrying to push through legislation to establish AI guardrails. Lawmakers are coming to the realization that a federal regulatory framework is needed to prevent AI from spinning dangerously outside human control.

As such, several lawmakers have recently introduced a slew of proposals to address growing AI concerns and implement legal guardrails – despite a tight timeline before the November midterm elections (with other legislative priorities that could impede any meaningful action on AI).

Senate AI Committee Markup Delayed Until September

Senate Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee Chairman Ted Cruz (R-TX) announced on July 29 that the committee has postponed its anticipated markup of artificial intelligence legislation until September after senators were unable to reach a bipartisan agreement on a package of AI bills. Instead, the committee will focus in September on legislation addressing children’s online safety, including the Kids Online Safety Act and related measures.

Chairman Cruz stated that the committee still intends to advance AI legislation but acknowledged that negotiations have taken longer than expected to reach a bipartisan consensus. The delay underscores the continuing challenges lawmakers face in developing a comprehensive federal framework for artificial intelligence despite growing bipartisan recognition that congressional action is needed.

In early June, Sen. Cruz had asked Republican committee members to submit their proposals to regulate the AI industry.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) and Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) have been working on a catastrophic risk bill that could be part of the Commerce Committee’s markup agenda next month. Sen. Thune recently stated, “More to come. We are negotiating with the Democrats and deciding — trying to find the bills that have the best maximum positive impact and also best chance of bipartisan support and passing law.”

In mid-July, Sen. Cruz, with Sen. Raphael Warnock (D-GA), introduced the Human Dignity and Emerging Technologies Act, which would establish the United States Commission on Human Dignity within the legislative branch to advise Congress on the ethical and policy implications of emerging technologies, like artificial intelligence.

In the past, Sen. Cruz has expressed concerns that too much federal government intervention into AI policy could threaten innovation and stifle freedom of expression. According to reports last month, Sen. Cruz believes in very targeted federal action to address issues like catastrophic risk or deepfakes — rather than a massive regulatory framework for AI. However, recent AI incidents exposing cybersecurity vulnerabilities could force Sen. Cruz to take a more expansive legislative approach.

On the Democratic side of the upper chamber, Sen. Mark Warner (D-VA), Vice Chairman of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, unveiled on July 21 “A Framework for America’s AI Future,” a comprehensive legislative agenda outlining the “rules of the road” for artificial intelligence, while ensuring that the United States leads the world in developing AI responsibly.

The framework addresses four key priorities: building AI infrastructure responsibly; promoting competition and safety; preparing workers for economic disruption and technological change; and strengthening America’s national security advantage. For example, Sen. Warner’s bill, the Secure AI Development Act, would establish a mandatory testing framework for frontier models before they are granted broader public access.

Bipartisan House Lawmakers Hoping to Force Congressional Action Before Midterms

On the House side, Reps. Jay Obernolte (R-CA) and Lori Trahan (D-MA) are hoping to build consensus on their new comprehensive AI regulatory bill, the Frontier Risk Oversight, National Transparency, Independent Evaluation, and Reporting (FRONTIER) Act, which would establish a national, risk-based framework governing the development and deployment of the most advanced artificial intelligence models.

According to Reps. Obernolte and Trahan, the FRONTIER Act would establish tiered requirements based on the size of a frontier AI developer, including model cards, risk-management frameworks, independent audits, incident reporting, and ongoing assessments. The bill would also create a uniform national standard for transparency, auditing, and reporting of catastrophic risk to prevent a patchwork of state regulations.

The bill is a reworked version of a discussion draft Reps. Obernolte and Trahan unveiled several weeks ago, which was criticized by many of their Republican and Democratic colleagues. For example, the lawmakers scaled down provisions in their latest version relating to preemption of state AI laws – attempting to strike a balance between those who want the ability to replace local regulations with a federal framework governing AI, and those who want to leave regulatory action to the states.

Reps. Obernolte and Trahan expressed optimism that the House Energy and Commerce Committee will schedule a hearing or markup on their bill when the House returns in September after their summer recess. Expressing urgency on an issue that has “earth-shattering news practically every week”, Obernolte indicated in an interview in late July that he “absolutely” thought the bill could move out of the Energy and Commerce Committee in the fall.

However, Energy and Commerce Committee Chairman Brett Guthrie (R-KY) has been noncommittal on the FRONTIER ACT – or any comprehensive AI bill – stating, “I’m not sure if we’ll get there before the election.” 

House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-LA), while not addressing the FRONTIER Act specifically, said in an interview that Republican leadership favored a regulatory framework that they deemed not overly burdensome. “We’re trying to get AI preemption … but we also want to make sure that we don’t impede innovation with heavy regulation from the government,” said Scalise.

House Bipartisan Bill Would Require “Kill Switch”

Less extensive AI bills have also been recently introduced in the House.

In late July, Reps. Nathaniel Moran (R-TX) and Ted Lieu (D-CA), who Co-Chairs House Democratic Commission on AI, introduced the AI Kill Switch Act (H.R. 9917), which would require developers of the most powerful AI systems to maintain the technical capability to throttle, suspend, or shut them down. The bill would allow the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), in consultation with the Secretary of Commerce and the Director of National Intelligence, to order a slowdown or shutdown of an AI system that can cause catastrophic harm. In addition, the bill would:

• allow DHS to charge a company not in compliance with the “kill switch” requirement up to $2 million per day, while companies that fail to comply with a shutdown order would be subject to a penalty of up to $20 million per day;
• task the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) with determining specific rules for which companies, models and security incidents would be covered by the bill, including which models could advance AI capabilities in national security; and
• require incident reporting and preserve forensic records so we actually learn from failures instead of only hearing about them after the fact.

The bill would apply to AI companies that bring in at least $500 million in revenue from such technology per year and would generally cover models developed using at least $100 million worth of computing power. The bill has the support of several AI-safety groups, including the Americans for Responsible Innovation, the Alliance for Secure AI, AI Policy Network, ControlAI, and Future of Life Institute.

In June, Rep. Moran also introduced a bill, the AI Incident Reporting Act, that would require AI developers to report security incidents involving frontier models to the Commerce Department, with Commerce required to inform Congress within 48 hours of the most serious incidents.

Congressional Outlook

While the House has already started its summer recess, the Senate will leave for its recess after this week – returning, along with the House, in mid-September. Even after returning from their summer recess, both chambers face a daunting list of tasks before the midterm elections that could make it difficult for any immediate, substantive legislative action on an AI framework.

Sen. Cruz’s decision to delay the Senate Commerce Committee’s consideration of artificial intelligence legislation until September illustrates both the complexity of the issue and the difficulty of achieving bipartisan consensus. Although lawmakers continue to express urgency around establishing federal AI guardrails, any significant legislative action will have to wait until at least after Congress returns from its summer recess – and even then, there’s no assurance that Congress will take up precious floor time before heading out again to campaign before November’s midterm elections.

Even with the delay, AI remains a major congressional priority. Just last week, Senate committees held hearings examining the technology’s impact on the workforce, cybersecurity, telecommunications, and consumer protection.

The authors thank Gabrielle Kucan for her contributions to this article.