Fact Check: What we know about 'Big Beautiful Bill' banning states from regulating AI for 10 years
Claim:
H.R. 1, commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, contains a provision that bans states from regulating artificial intelligence for 10 years.
Rating:
Context:
If the "Big Beautiful Bill" becomes law, states and local governments would be unable to enforce any regulations on AI systems and models involved in interstate commerce for 10 years. There are exceptions for any laws or regulations that facilitate the rollout, operations or adoption of AI models and systems.
A budget bill that Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives passed on May 22, 2025, allegedly bans all 50 states from regulating artificial intelligence for a decade, according to claims shared on social media in early June.
As the Senate prepared to take up H.R. 1, more commonly known as the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, people online expressed their concerns about the alleged AI-related provisions in the legislation.
For example, one X user shared this claim (archived) on June 2, 2025:
Similar claims also appeared in Facebook (archived) posts (archived) around the same time.
Snopes reviewed the text of H.R. 1 and found a provision that bans states from regulating AI systems "entered into interstate commerce" for 10 years in Section 43201 of the bill.
Paragraph (c) in that section outlines the 10-year moratorium on states' AI regulation:
(1) In general. – Except as provided in paragraph (2), no State or political subdivision thereof may enforce, during the 10-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, any law or regulation of that State or a political subdivision thereof limiting, restricting, or otherwise regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems entered into interstate commerce.
In other words, if the bill becomes law, states and local governments will be blocked from enforcing any regulations on AI systems and models that are involved in interstate commerce for 10 years.
The phrase "interstate commerce" broadly refers to business or activity that crosses state lines. But in the context of this bill, the distinction likely doesn't mean much. As a result, we've rated the claim mostly true.
The Supreme Court has said activities that happen entirely within one state can still count as interstate commerce if they have a significant enough impact on the national economy, as David Brody, a civil rights and technology legal expert, explained in an article for Tech Policy Press published on May 27, 2025. That means many AI systems would likely be subject to the federal rules if H.R. 1 passes.
However, there are some exceptions to the 10-year moratorium on states' AI regulation — notably for any laws or regulations that facilitate the rollout, operations or adoption of AI models and systems, according to the bill text.
Snopes reached out to the White House and the office of U.S. Rep. Jodey Arrington, R-Texas, who introduced H.R. 1, for comment about the 10-year moratorium on states regulating AI and the purpose of including it in the bill, and is awaiting responses.
Multiple Republican lawmakers have voiced support for the 10-year moratorium, with some saying a patchwork of state laws doesn't support innovation and others stressing the importance of a federal approach to AI regulation.
But other federal and state lawmakers as well as watchdog groups have strongly opposed the proposed rule over concerns about limiting states' ability to deal with potential harms caused by AI.
For example, U.S. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., said in an X post on June 3, 2025, that she "did not know about" the section of H.R. 1 that bans states from regulating AI for a decade, adding that she is "adamantly opposed" to the provision.
Hundreds of state lawmakers across the political spectrum also signed a letter addressed to the U.S. House and Senate on June 3, 2025, expressing "strong opposition" to the 10-year moratorium on AI regulation.
The letter read in part, "The proposed 10-year freeze of state and local regulation of AI and automated decision systems would cut short democratic discussion of AI policy in the states with a sweeping moratorium that threatens to halt a broad array of laws and restrict policymakers from responding to emerging issues."
Nearly two weeks earlier, a coalition of advocacy organizations, including Common Sense Media, Fairplay and Encode, also called on congressional leaders to oppose the provision, writing in part that AI companies would have "no rules, no accountability and total control" if it were to take effect.
In a letter dated May 21, 2025, the groups wrote:
As written, the provision is so broad it would block states from enacting any AI-related legislation, including bills addressing hyper-sexualized AI companions, social media recommendation algorithms, protections for whistleblowers, and more. It ties lawmakers' hands for a decade, sidelining policymakers and leaving families on their own as they face risks and harms that emerge with this fast-evolving technology in the years to come.
Discussions about AI companions and possible issues arising from their use have gained prominence in recent months. For example, research from Drexel University in Philadelphia suggests that inappropriate behavior, including sexual harassment, during conversations with AI chatbots is "becoming a widespread problem," the university said on May 5, 2025.
Consumer Reports, another advocacy organization, also raised concerns about states being unable to deal with a variety of issues that AI technology poses, including sexually explicit images, audio and video created without a person's consent.
Snopes has previously looked into other claims about the "Big Beautiful Bill," including whether it contains a provision allowing the U.S. president to delay or cancel elections.
Arrington, Jodey. "Text - H.R.1 - 119th Congress (2025-2026): One Big Beautiful Bill Act." Congress.gov, 2025, www.congress.gov/bill/119th-congress/house-bill/1/text. Accessed 4 June 2025.
Brody, David. "The Big Beautiful Bill Could Decimate Legal Accountability for Tech and Anything Tech Touches." Tech Policy Press, 27 May 2025, www.techpolicy.press/the-big-beautiful-bill-could-decimate-legal-accountability-for-tech-and-anything-tech-touches/. Accessed 4 June 2025.
Cornell Law School. "Commerce Clause." Legal Information Institute, 18 Sept. 2018, www.law.cornell.edu/wex/commerce_clause. Accessed 4 June 2025.
Hendrix, Justin. "Transcript: US House Subcommittee Hosts Hearing on 'AI Regulation and the Future of US Leadership.'" Tech Policy Press, 21 May 2025, www.techpolicy.press/transcript-us-house-subcommittee-hosts-hearing-on-ai-regulation-and-the-future-of-us-leadership/. Accessed 4 June 2025.
Open letter from consumer advocacy organizations to congressional leadership. Common Sense Media, 21 May 2025, https://www.commonsensemedia.org/sites/default/files/featured-content/files/common-sense-media-letter-in-opposition-of-federal-ai-moratorium.pdf. Accessed 4 June 2025.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
11 minutes ago
- Forbes
AMA: Doctors And Patients Hurt By ‘Big Beautiful Bill'
The American Medical Association says legislation wending its way through the Republican-controlled ... More Congress would 'take us backward' as a country by cutting health benefits for poor and low-income Americans, the group's president said Friday, June 6. In this photo, the US Capitol in Washington, DC, US, on Tuesday, June 3, 2025. Photographer: Eric Lee/Bloomberg The American Medical Association says legislation wending its way through the Republican-controlled Congress would 'take us backward' as a country by cutting health benefits for poor and low-income Americans. Meeting for its annual policy-making House of Delegates this weekend in Chicago, the AMA is rallying physicians to thwart the legislation now before the U.S. Senate. Legislation known as the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' that narrowly passed the Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives two weeks ago 'would reduce federal Medicaid spending by $793 billion and that the Medicaid provisions would increase the number of uninsured people by 7.8 million,' a KFF analysis shows. 'We have to turn our anger into action,' AMA President Bruce A. Scott, M.D. said in a speech to AMA delegates Friday. 'I know our patience is being tested by this new administration and Congress.' The AMA said it has launched a 'grassroots campaign targeted at the Senate' in hopes of making changes to the legislation. The AMA is the nation's largest physician group with more than 200,000 members. 'The same House bill that brings us closer to finally tying future Medicare payments to the rising costs of running a practice, also takes us backwards by limiting access to care for millions of lower-income Americans,' Scott said. 'Medicare, Medicaid, and the Affordable Care Act are literal lifelines for children and families for whom subsidized health coverage is their only real option. We must do all we can to protect this safety net and continue to educate lawmakers on how best to target waste and fraud in the system without making it tougher for vulnerable populations to access care.' Scott, an otolaryngologist from Kentucky, said the Medicare physician payment system is broken and Congress hasn't addressed – as an increasing number of states have – prior authorization, the process of health insurers reviewing hospital admissions and medications. Prior authorization delays needed treatment and puts patient health in jeopardy, doctors say. 'I'm angry because the dysfunction in health care today goes hand in hand with years of dysfunction in Congress,' Scott added. 'I'm angry because physicians are bearing the brunt of a failed Medicare payment system. And while our pay has been cut by more than 33 percent in 25 years, we see hospitals and even health insurance companies receiving annual pay increases.' Meanwhile, the AMA says cuts to physician payments are pushing more physicians away from private practice and exacerbating the nation's doctor shortage. A recent analysis by AMN Healthcare shows only two in five physicians are now in doctor-owned private practices. And Americans in most U.S. cities face waits of at least one month before they can see certain specialists. 'Congress needs to know there is no 'care' in Medicare if there are no doctors," Scott said.
Yahoo
15 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Sen. Ted Cruz proposes withholding broadband funding from states that regulate AI
The Brief Senator Ted Cruz proposed that states attempting to regulate AI should lose federal broadband funding. This proposal is an addition to a House-passed bill aiming for a 10-year ban on state AI regulation. Critics argue Cruz's plan is "undemocratic and cruel," forcing states to choose between broadband access and AI consumer protection. WASHINGTON - U.S. Senator Ted Cruz (R-Texas) proposed on Thursday an alternative punishment for planned legislation that would set a 10-year ban on state regulation of Artificial Intelligence model learning. Under Cruz's budget reconciliation proposal, an attempt to regulate AI would be prohibited from collecting federal funding provided by the Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment (BEAD) program. The Proposal The U.S. House of Representatives passed their version of House Resolution 1, the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," on May 22. In part, the budget bill would ban state regulation on AI for 10 years. As chairman of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, Cruz authored a budget reconciliation that he says is intended to "fulfill President Trump's agenda." In a summary of the proposal, he refers to state regulation as "strangling AI deployment," comparing it to EU precautions against tech development. Cruz's proposal adds $500 million to the BEAD program, which has already administered $42.45 billion to the states in order to expand high-speed internet access across the country. It also prevents states from receiving any of that funding if they attempt to regulate AI. Dig deeper Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-Georgia) has recently spoken out against HR 1, saying the anti-regulatory section alone will cost Congress her vote. Greene explained that she discovered the controversial provision, located on pages 278-279 of the bill, only after the House had already passed the legislation. Once the bill returns to the House following Senate deliberations, Greene says she will change sides based on the matter of AI. What they're saying Advocacy group Public Citizen released a commentary on Cruz's proposal, referring to it as a "display of corporate appeasement." In the article, J.B. Branch, a Big Tech accountability advocate, included the following statement: "This is a senatorial temper tantrum masquerading as policy. Americans have loudly rejected Senator Cruz's dangerous proposal to give tech giants a decade of immunity from state regulation. State legislatures, attorneys general, and citizens across all 50 states have demanded that Congress step away from overhauling consumer protections put in place in the absence of federal leadership. But instead of listening to the American people, Senate Republicans threw a fit and tied vital digital funding to corporate impunity. "With this move, Republicans are telling millions of Americans: 'You can have broadband but only if your state gives up the right to protect you from AI abuses.' It's undemocratic and cruel. Republicans would rather give Big Tech a 10-year hall pass to experiment on the American people unchecked, rather than give underserved rural and urban communities the ability to compete in the digital economy. Congress must reject this corporate giveaway and refocus their energy on representing the public interest." In her statements criticizing the anti-regulation portion of HR 1, Greene expressed concerns about developing rapidly evolving tech without checks and balances. "No one can predict what AI will be in one year, let alone 10," Greene said. "But I can tell you this: I'm pro-humanity, not pro-transhumanity. And I will be voting NO on any bill that strips states of their right to protect American jobs and families." What's next HR 1 is expected to continue undergoing changes in the Senate before returning to the House for another vote. Cruz's proposal has yet to be officially added to the legislation. The Source Information in this article comes from public U.S. Congress filings, Public Citizen, and previous FOX 4 coverage.
Bloomberg
16 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
US Inflation to Tick Higher as Tariffs Reach Consumers
By and Craig Stirling Save Subscribe to Economics Daily for the latest news and analysis. US consumers probably saw slightly faster inflation in May, notably for merchandise, as companies gradually pass along higher import duties.
