# content
Priestley: Artificial intelligence doesn’t wait. States can’t either.

On the White House executive order targeting state AI laws.

by Rep. Monique Priestley (D, Orange-2)

As Vermont enters a new legislative session, many legislators and members of the public have asked about the White House’s December 11 executive order targeting state-level artificial intelligence laws. Vermonters deserve to know that state leaders are paying close attention, are prepared, and are not backing down from our responsibility to protect people from real and growing technological harms.

Rep. Monique Priestley

The executive order does not create new federal law, nor does it repeal existing state protections. What it does do is signal an aggressive attempt to intimidate states that are doing the work the federal government has repeatedly failed to do. This includes directing federal agencies to challenge state laws, raising the prospect of litigation, and threatening the use of discretionary funding to slow or chill state action.

That approach is reckless, and it is wrong.

I speak to this moment informed by years of national, bipartisan work on technology policy. I serve as Co-Chair of the Future Caucus National Task Force on AI Policy, as a member of the National Conference of State Legislatures Task Force on Artificial Intelligence, Cybersecurity, and Privacy, and on the Legislative Steering Committee of the State AI Policy Forum at Princeton University. Through these roles, I work closely with state legislators across the country and with civil society organizations confronting the same risks to safety, privacy, and civil rights.

That national work is reinforced by what I have heard here at home. Over the past few months, I have traveled across Vermont hosting public town halls with VPIRG as part of the People vs Big Tech series. In libraries, town halls, and community spaces, Vermonters from every corner of the state have shared concerns about the speed at which technology is reshaping their lives. People are worried about how their data is used, how automated systems affect prices and opportunities, and how decisions once made by people are increasingly made by opaque technologies they cannot see or control. These concerns are personal, bipartisan, and urgent.

What is happening now did not come out of nowhere. Efforts to broadly block or preempt state AI laws were repeatedly rejected by Congress. Similar language failed overwhelmingly during debate on the so-called Big Beautiful Bill. It failed again when floated for inclusion in the National Defense Authorization Act. There were reports it might be folded into federal children’s privacy legislation, and that effort failed as well. After Congress refused, the executive order became a last-ditch attempt to accomplish through pressure what could not be achieved through legislation.

Across the country, lawmakers from every political background are asking the same questions Vermonters are asking right now. What is the plan. Are we taking this seriously. Will states step up if Washington does not.

The answer is yes.

States have always been the laboratories of democracy, and never has that role been more critical. Technology does not wait for Congress, and it does not respect state borders. Artificial intelligence systems, data brokers, and automated decision-making already influence who can get housing, secure a loan, afford groceries, obtain insurance, land a job, or access basic public services. These impacts are not hypothetical, and it is no longer credible to claim it is too soon to act.

The executive order relies on legal theories that many experts agree are weak. Courts have consistently affirmed that states have broad authority to regulate harmful conduct within their borders. Most existing state AI laws are carefully written to do exactly that. They focus on preventing discrimination, deception, unsafe deployment, and abuse. These are core state responsibilities, not federal overreach.

Threatening states over discretionary grants, particularly funding intended to support rural broadband services like cybersecurity, digital literacy, and privacy protections, sends the wrong message to communities that are already underserved. Rural states like Vermont should not be coerced to choose between protecting people and accessing federal resources meant to help them thrive.

As legislators juggle urgent conversations about housing, education, healthcare, and economic stability, technology policy can no longer be treated as a side issue. It requires sustained attention, dedicated expertise, and legislative structures that reflect how deeply technology affects every sector of our economy and daily life. We may be behind, but we can catch up. Vermont has led before, and we can lead again.

Just as important, Vermont is not alone. State legislators across the country are coordinating, sharing legal analysis, and standing together. This is not about partisanship. It is about duty. When the federal government hesitates or yields to industry pressure, states must act to protect people, safeguard privacy, and ensure innovation serves the public interest.

Vermonters should be assured that state leaders are stepping up together. Lawmakers in Vermont and across the nation are taking safety, data protection, and human dignity seriously. We will continue to watch closely and push back against efforts to weaken states’ ability to protect the people we serve.

Guardrails matter. Privacy matters. State leadership matters.

And this work is far from over. States are only beginning to exercise the leadership this moment demands.

# contentMap.en
Priestley: Artificial intelligence doesn’t wait. States can’t either.

On the White House executive order targeting state AI laws.

by Rep. Monique Priestley (D, Orange-2)

As Vermont enters a new legislative session, many legislators and members of the public have asked about the White House’s December 11 executive order targeting state-level artificial intelligence laws. Vermonters deserve to know that state leaders are paying close attention, are prepared, and are not backing down from our responsibility to protect people from real and growing technological harms.

Rep. Monique Priestley

The executive order does not create new federal law, nor does it repeal existing state protections. What it does do is signal an aggressive attempt to intimidate states that are doing the work the federal government has repeatedly failed to do. This includes directing federal agencies to challenge state laws, raising the prospect of litigation, and threatening the use of discretionary funding to slow or chill state action.

That approach is reckless, and it is wrong.

I speak to this moment informed by years of national, bipartisan work on technology policy. I serve as Co-Chair of the Future Caucus National Task Force on AI Policy, as a member of the National Conference of State Legislatures Task Force on Artificial Intelligence, Cybersecurity, and Privacy, and on the Legislative Steering Committee of the State AI Policy Forum at Princeton University. Through these roles, I work closely with state legislators across the country and with civil society organizations confronting the same risks to safety, privacy, and civil rights.

That national work is reinforced by what I have heard here at home. Over the past few months, I have traveled across Vermont hosting public town halls with VPIRG as part of the People vs Big Tech series. In libraries, town halls, and community spaces, Vermonters from every corner of the state have shared concerns about the speed at which technology is reshaping their lives. People are worried about how their data is used, how automated systems affect prices and opportunities, and how decisions once made by people are increasingly made by opaque technologies they cannot see or control. These concerns are personal, bipartisan, and urgent.

What is happening now did not come out of nowhere. Efforts to broadly block or preempt state AI laws were repeatedly rejected by Congress. Similar language failed overwhelmingly during debate on the so-called Big Beautiful Bill. It failed again when floated for inclusion in the National Defense Authorization Act. There were reports it might be folded into federal children’s privacy legislation, and that effort failed as well. After Congress refused, the executive order became a last-ditch attempt to accomplish through pressure what could not be achieved through legislation.

Across the country, lawmakers from every political background are asking the same questions Vermonters are asking right now. What is the plan. Are we taking this seriously. Will states step up if Washington does not.

The answer is yes.

States have always been the laboratories of democracy, and never has that role been more critical. Technology does not wait for Congress, and it does not respect state borders. Artificial intelligence systems, data brokers, and automated decision-making already influence who can get housing, secure a loan, afford groceries, obtain insurance, land a job, or access basic public services. These impacts are not hypothetical, and it is no longer credible to claim it is too soon to act.

The executive order relies on legal theories that many experts agree are weak. Courts have consistently affirmed that states have broad authority to regulate harmful conduct within their borders. Most existing state AI laws are carefully written to do exactly that. They focus on preventing discrimination, deception, unsafe deployment, and abuse. These are core state responsibilities, not federal overreach.

Threatening states over discretionary grants, particularly funding intended to support rural broadband services like cybersecurity, digital literacy, and privacy protections, sends the wrong message to communities that are already underserved. Rural states like Vermont should not be coerced to choose between protecting people and accessing federal resources meant to help them thrive.

As legislators juggle urgent conversations about housing, education, healthcare, and economic stability, technology policy can no longer be treated as a side issue. It requires sustained attention, dedicated expertise, and legislative structures that reflect how deeply technology affects every sector of our economy and daily life. We may be behind, but we can catch up. Vermont has led before, and we can lead again.

Just as important, Vermont is not alone. State legislators across the country are coordinating, sharing legal analysis, and standing together. This is not about partisanship. It is about duty. When the federal government hesitates or yields to industry pressure, states must act to protect people, safeguard privacy, and ensure innovation serves the public interest.

Vermonters should be assured that state leaders are stepping up together. Lawmakers in Vermont and across the nation are taking safety, data protection, and human dignity seriously. We will continue to watch closely and push back against efforts to weaken states’ ability to protect the people we serve.

Guardrails matter. Privacy matters. State leadership matters.

And this work is far from over. States are only beginning to exercise the leadership this moment demands.