By Johnathan K. Hustis

StateScoop, a news outlet from Scoop News Group that covers state and local government affairs, recently published an article by journalist Keely Quinlan that puts a spotlight on a tussle between state governments and the federal government about AI governance. Vigorous objections were expressed by 40 state attorneys general in a letter to Congress. The attorneys general stated their opposition to a proposed federal moratorium on state laws governing AI governance. The moratorium is part of the federal budget reconciliation proposal that was narrowly passed by the House on May 22, 2025.

This citizen's reaction is that the state attorneys general are right, at least for now. My reasons? AI governance is at least as experimental as the subject matter of AI. Texas (God bless us!) has risen to the challenge, moving ahead with what appear to be sincere, thoughtful, and committed efforts to get reasonable and effective initial state regulation in place. (See The New Texas AI Bill and Texas Responsible AI Governance Act: Cleaned Up (?) & Out of the House!)  The Texas lawmakers seem to be on track to adopt something this legislative session.

Other states are moving too. (See US AI Governance Regulations.) As a Texan representing Texas companies who use and implement AI, I want to see this happen in Texas sooner, rather than later. That's what is happening today.

Perhaps federal legislation will be a better idea someday. It may be needed then to reduce or eliminate the inefficiency of varying state requirements. For now, let state governments watch, consult with, and learn from one another. My fond hope is that at least some state governments compete prudently and share knowledge to develop their own best of breed AI governance legislation this year. Then others will follow.

Whether they collaborate or not, state governments realize that each must deal with the avalanche and rapidly changing consequences of AI adoption in its own state.  Add to that the impact of national and international AI adoption on each state.

Texas, one of the more business-oriented states, will hopefully be at the front of the pack. Enacting reasonable AI governance laws will encourage responsible AI adoption, to protect the citizens and the state’s business-friendly reputation. In doing so Texas will continue to compete for the best companies and employees to relocate to Texas. The enacted law may be initially imperfect, but the currently proposed Texas bill is a pretty good start. It’s also better than waiting for coherent federal legislation or enduring what comes out of today’s highly distracted Congress.

If Congress wants to address AI now, it should focus on national security and international commerce. That sounds tricky but worthwhile, while the states are experimenting with their own AI governance laws. This division of labor might encourage intelligent and thoughtful back and forth between our federal representatives and their local constituents. Sounds good to me.

Finally, preemptive federal legislation will likely become necessary to create more uniform national standards, after the states have lived with the consequences of their own and one another’s AI governance laws. Congress then will have more history, broader common experience, and some well-developed examples to look at, in addition to the international examples provided by other forums such as the EU. For example, the Texas House, thank goodness, has demonstrated its seriousness about listening and responding to a range of possible approaches. It improved its first, EU-like, January proposal to something better and not EU-like. That amended bill has now gone to the Texas Senate. Thanks to Rep. Giovanni Capriglione and the House for sticking with it through some big modifications.

More data and quicker action are needed nationwide. My hope is that the states will do it first. They are investing time and effort today. This citizen says let them finish Round 1!

Jonathan K. Hustis, the author, is a career business executive and practicing lawyer in technology businesses. He is a member of Fulton Jeang PLLC. The opinions above are his own, not those of the firm. Jon practices as an Executive General Counsel / Chief Legal Officer for start-ups and small to mid-size businesses. That practice includes technology companies and other businesses, corporate governance, M&A, compliance, financing, contracts, and privacy law. He is admitted to practice in Texas and federal courts in the Northern District of Texas. Jon is also a Certified Information Privacy Professional/US. You can reach Jon at jhustis@fultonjeang.com.

#general counsel #SMB #AI Law #CEO #tech business #tech law #aigovernance #ai

@fultonjeang @jonathanhustis