According to Forbes, on Monday, July 28, 2025, President Donald Trump said he will create a “one-rule” executive order to regulate artificial intelligence at the federal level, a move designed to override state regulations. He specifically mentioned creating a “one rulebook” to help companies avoid dealing with individual state approval processes, calling many states “bad actors.” This announcement follows his administration’s AI Action Plan launched in July and an executive order signed just last week to use government data for AI research models. The policy is framed as a push for U.S. dominance in AI and is described as a major victory for tech giants. Those companies have long expressed a desire for deregulation, with some spending hundreds of millions of dollars to battle AI regulation efforts.
Stakeholder Shakeup
So, who wins and who loses here? Look, for the big tech companies—your Googles, Metas, and OpenAIs—this is basically Christmas in July. They’ve been pouring money into fighting a patchwork of rules, and now they might get a single, federal framework. Probably one that’s a lot friendlier to rapid development and deployment. The promise of “one rulebook” means they can build for a national market without worrying about 50 different sets of compliance headaches. That’s a huge operational and financial relief.
The State Power Dynamic
But here’s the thing: this is about way more than just streamlining bureaucracy. It’s a direct power grab from the states. California, for instance, has been aggressively working on its own AI regulations. This federal “one rule” would attempt to nullify those efforts. Is that good? It depends on your perspective. Proponents argue it prevents innovation from being stifled by the strictest state actor. Critics see it as dismantling consumer and civil rights protections that states are trying to build. It sets up a major legal and philosophical battle over who gets to control the rules of our digital future.
What It Means For Everyone Else
For smaller developers and enterprises, the impact is mixed. A single federal standard could lower the barrier to entry—you don’t need a massive legal team to navigate conflicting laws. That’s a potential positive. But if that federal standard is written largely by and for the giants, does it really help the little guy? Or does it just cement the dominance of the existing players by creating rules they can easily afford to follow? And for users, it’s a big question mark. Will “U.S. dominance” as a primary goal prioritize safety and ethical considerations, or will it push them to the sidelines? The AI Action Plan and last week’s data order show this is a top-tier priority, but the details of this “one rule” will tell the real story. One thing’s for sure: the fight over AI regulation just entered a much more centralized, and contentious, phase.
