A growing patchwork of conflicting state laws around artificial intelligence (AI) risks undermining U.S. leadership in what is expected to be one of the most transformative technologies in generations, according to U.S. Rep. Gabe Evans (R-CO).
“Like it or not, artificial intelligence is here to stay. The U.S. can choose to lead the world in this transformative technology or we can regulate it into the hands of Communist China,” Rep. Evans said in a statement. “If we care about American jobs, national security, and staying ahead of our foreign adversaries, we need a smart, consistent, national approach that keeps innovation here at home.”
The congressman reiterated his concerns in a Feb. 19 letter sent to Trump administration officials in which he and U.S. Rep. Nick Langworthy (R-NY) highlighted issues with enacted state-level regulations on AI and their impact on American innovation and competitiveness.
“In 2025, states enacted 145 AI-related laws, an almost 50 percent increase over the previous year,” they wrote, noting the rapid expansion of state-level AI regulation.
The members urged both the U.S. Commerce Department and the U.S. Department of Justice to carefully evaluate its impact on interstate commerce and constitutional protections.
“As President Trump’s Dec. 11, 2025 executive order (EO) makes clear: a patchwork of conflicting, burdensome, and imprudent state regulations threatens U.S. AI leadership,” wrote Rep. Evans and his colleague. “While we recognize that existing laws of general applicability already protect consumers from many AI risks, we agree with the president that U.S. AI leadership can be enhanced through a ‘minimally burdensome national policy framework’ that ensures ‘children are protected’ and ‘communities are safeguarded.’”
The lawmakers also noted that the Secretary of Commerce has been tasked with evaluating recent state AI laws for their impact on interstate commerce and for their consistency with the First Amendment, and requested that as this evaluation gets under way, that two laws from New York and Colorado be included on the list.
“While [these] laws specified… are not a comprehensive list, we nonetheless urge you to include them in the department’s report, as they exemplify the conflicting, burdensome, and imprudent state regulations that the president’s EO seeks to address,” wrote Rep. Evans and his colleague.