Without any legislative oversight at the state level, the public could be forced to contend with AI shaping their world with no guardrails.

BY SAM BLUM, SENIOR WRITER @SAMMBLUM

President Donald Trump. Illustration: Inc.; Photo: Getty Images

Marjorie Taylor Greene was surprised. After voting in favor of President Trump’s budget reconciliation bill, the Republican congresswoman from Georgia was apparently dismayed to learn of an amendment buried deep within the text of what the White House has dubbed the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025.” 

The source of Greene’s anger and confusion? An amendment barring states from regulating the development and deployment of AI for the next 10 years.

Normally an unwavering ally of MAGA, Greene on Tuesday wrote on X: “Full transparency, I did not know about this section on pages 278-279 of the OBBB that strips states of the right to make laws or regulate AI for 10 years. I am adamantly OPPOSED to this and it is a violation of state rights and I would have voted NO if I had known this was in there.” 

Silicon Valley is a lobbying powerhouse. But there is nothing in recent history that exemplifies the industry’s current foothold in Washington, D.C. quite like the proposed moratorium on state AI regulation. “The only thing I think that is even akin to it, which is complicated, is the Section 230 carve-out for internet companies that they aren’t liable for speech, which is nowhere near as sweeping as this [AI] preemption is,” says Samantha Gordon, chief program officer at TechEquity, a policy and research organization. 

Featured Video

The Man Behind the Wheel of Driverless Trucks

Gordon is referring to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act of 1996, which limits liability of internet providers and social media companies for the speech of their users. It’s a

© Inc.com