What publishers need to know about Trump's latest AI executive order

On December 11, 2025, President Trump signed a sweeping executive order aimed at creating a national framework for artificial intelligence (AI) which will limit the ability of states to craft their own AI rules. The order seeks to prevent a patchwork of state AI regulations and promote uniform standards nationwide. 

What does the executive order do?

The order frames artificial intelligence as a matter of national economic competitiveness and security and argues that a mishmash of state laws covering issues like transparency, reporting requirements, and restrictions on AI deployment threatens to slow innovation and fragment the market. It seeks to replace them with a single, unified national policy.

To achieve that goal, the order directs the Department of Justice to review state AI laws to see if they conflict with the federal government’s approach to AI or infringe upon constitutional principles such as Congress’ power to regulate interstate commerce. Regulations that are deemed to cross those boundaries can be challenged by a new AI Litigation Task Force. 

The order also uses a quieter but potentially more powerful lever: Federal funding. While the order does not automatically cut off funding, it creates a pathway for the federal government to pressure states financially to soften or repeal AI regulations that conflict with national policy goals. Over time, this could make it difficult for states to experiment with stronger AI oversight.

Why this executive order matters to publishers

The order puts federal policy firmly in the driver’s seat and limits the role of state laws that might require different standards for how AI is used in content creation. In recent years, states have been among the most active venues for AI regulation. Legislatures have proposed or passed laws requiring disclosure of AI-generated content, imposing record-keeping or reporting obligations, or setting guardrails around automated systems used in media and advertising. Publishers operating across multiple states have been forced to track these developments carefully.

Under the executive order, many of those state-level efforts could be challenged as inconsistent with a new federal AI policy framework or eventually preempted by federal standards. That creates both opportunity and risk for publishers.

On the one hand, a single national standard could make compliance easier. Instead of navigating a maze of state disclosure rules or AI-use restrictions, publishers might eventually face a single framework governing how AI can be used. For national and global publishers, that kind of uniformity could lower legal costs and operational friction. At the same time, given the mercurial nature of the present administration, that uniformity could prove illusory. The order has already divided the GOP, with state leaders like Florida governor Ron DeSantis speaking out against it.

Why publishers might welcome federal rules

On the other hand, the order raises the possibility that state-level protections disappear before meaningful federal ones are in place. If, for example, a state mandates that generative AI outputs in news articles always be labeled, that requirement might be targeted by the administration as a burdensome state regulation. Publishers could then find themselves in a regulatory vacuum where state regulations cannot be enforced but federal policy remains inchoate.

The executive order also has implications for how publishers think about copyright and training data. By prioritizing minimal burdens on AI development and signaling resistance to state-level intervention, the order may strengthen the position of AI developers in ongoing debates over the use of copyrighted text to train large language models. For publishers already engaged in litigation or licensing negotiations around AI training, the broader policy direction set by the order could influence how aggressively those practices are policed in the future.

More broadly, the order signals that disputes over AI and publishing are likely to move out of state legislatures and into federal agencies and courts. For publishers, that means the next phase of AI governance will be less about tracking fifty different statehouses and more about monitoring Washington.

What are others saying about the order?

Legal and regulatory experts have noted that the order’s aggressive federal preemption strategy could spark prolonged litigation and uncertainty before any clear standards emerge. Analysts observed that while the order seeks a uniform national policy, it also raises complex constitutional issues that could lead to extended court battles over whether the federal government can sidestep state authority in this domain. 

Some legal experts argue that the executive order’s reliance on litigation and federal funding levers rather than new legislation may be controversial and legally untested. Snell & Wilmer, a policy firm, described the order as signaling an assertion of federal primacy over AI policy but cautioned that the administration is pursuing that primacy largely through executive action and agency processes rather than through clear statutory authority. 

Conclusion

By asserting federal primacy and actively discouraging state-level experimentation, the administration is reshaping where and how the rules governing AI in publishing will be made. In the short term, publishers are likely to face continued uncertainty since state regulations will remain on the books while disputes over their legality play out in court. That means publishers must still navigate existing disclosure requirements and AI-related obligations while watching closely for actions that could redraw the regulatory map.

Over the longer term, a national AI framework could bring greater consistency and predictability for publishers operating across multiple states. But that outcome depends heavily on the substance of any federal standards that follow. If those standards prioritize flexibility and innovation without addressing transparency and accountability, publishers may find it harder to maintain reader trust.

For a look at Trump’s earlier executive order launching the Genesis Mission, check out this post.