The White House on Friday released its long-anticipated national policy framework for AI, setting out the Trump administration’s guiding principles for where Congress should—and should not—focus its efforts to craft specific federal AI regulations. The four-page outline comes one day after Sen. Marsha Blackburn (R-TN), considered a key voice in congressional debates on AI policy, released her own 300-page draft policy proposal. Together, the two outlines are likely to form the basis for what could be a long, and possibly contentious, effort to develop comprehensive federal policy for AI.
Complete the form to unlock this article and enjoy unlimited free access to all PYMNTS content — no additional logins required.
yesSubscribe to our daily newsletter, PYMNTS Today.
By completing this form, you agree to receive marketing communications from PYMNTS and to the sharing of your information with our sponsor, if applicable, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and Terms and Conditions.
As expected, the White House framework overlaps a number of key areas of focus in Blackburn’s draft, including protections for children, preventing alleged censorship of political viewpoints, and preserving states’ authority to enforce generally applicable laws regarding consumer protections on AI systems, and to establish zoning laws for the placement of data centers. But the two proposals part ways on a number of other key elements.
Principle among those differences is their respective approaches to intellectual property. Where as Blackburn urges Congress to clarify through legislation that the unauthorized use of copyrighted works to train AI models is not fair use under the Copyright Act, the White House wants the issue left up to the courts, which are currently considering the question in dozens of lawsuits brought by artists and rightsholders against AI developers.
We’d love to be your preferred source for news.
Please add us to your preferred sources list so our news, data and interviews show up in your feed. Thanks!
“Although the Administration believes that training of AI models on copyrighted material does not violate copyright laws, it acknowledges arguments to the contrary exist and therefore supports allowing the Courts to resolve this issue,” the White House outline says. “Similarly, Congress should not take any actions that would impact the judiciary’s resolution of whether training on copyrighted material constitutes fair use.”
The White House recommendations are also more explicit in urging federal preemption of AI-specific state laws. “Preemption must ensure that State laws do not govern areas better suited to the Federal Government or act contrary to the United States’ national strategy to achieve global AI dominance,” the outline says. “States should not be permitted to regulate AI development, because it is an inherently interstate phenomenon with key foreign policy and national security implications.”
Related: Sen. Blackburn Releases Discussion Draft of Bill to Set Federal ‘Framework’ for AI Policy
The administration also wants to curb Congress’ penchant for creating elaborate federal bureaucracies to regulate major industry sectors. “Congress should not create any new federal rulemaking body to regulate AI, and should instead support development and deployment of sector-specific AI applications through existing regulatory bodies with subject matter expertise and through industry-led standards,” the outline says.
Other areas of focus in the White House draft include protections for ratepayers against surging electricity costs resulting from data centers, creating regulatory sandboxes for AI applications “that help unleash American ingenuity and further American leadership in AI development and deployment,” and encouraging the creation of education and workforce-training programs to accelerate development of an AI-capable workforce and promote corporate adoption of the technology.
Now that both Congress and the White House have put their cards on the table for framing federal policy on AI, interest groups on all sides of the debate are expected to throw their own chips into the pot to try to influence the scope and direction of any legislation the emerge from the discussions. Coming at the beginning of the midterm electoral season, the proposals’ recommendations are also likely to become hot issues on the campaign trail, where policymakers are already scrambling to grapple with growing consumer backlash against data-center development and AI’s alleged role in teenager suicides and psychological problems.
To borrow a phrase from Bette Davis’ character in “All About Eve,” fasten your seatbelts, it’s going to be bumpy ride.
US Appeals Court Tosses FTC Order Over Intuit’s “Free” TurboTax Ads
Mar 22, 2026 by CPI
Jury Finds Musk Liable for Misleading Twitter Shareholders During Takeover Fight
Mar 22, 2026 by CPI
FTC Launches Healthcare Task Force to Sharpen Enforcement
Mar 22, 2026 by CPI
White House Pushes Congress for National AI Law to Override State Rules
Mar 22, 2026 by CPI
Anthropic Copyright Settlement Lawyers Cut Fee Request to $187.5 Million
Mar 22, 2026 by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Data-Driven Competition
Mar 19, 2026 by CPI
Data-Driven Competition: Implications For Enforcement and Merger Control
Mar 19, 2026 by Alexandre de Corniere & Greg Taylor
From Tipping to Trustees: Why Data-Driven Markets Require Institutional Design, Not Optimization
Mar 19, 2026 by Jens Prüfer & Paul de Bijl
Data Barriers to Entry: What We’ve Learned About Spotting Them and What We Still Don’t Know About Solutions
Mar 19, 2026 by Bruno Carballa-Smichowski
When the Perfect Is the Enemy of the Good: Price Discrimination, Affordability, Precarity and Market Dynamism
Mar 19, 2026 by Dan Ciuriak
