“No State or political subdivision thereof may enforce any law or regulation regulating artificial intelligence models… during the 10-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.”
Sec. 43201(c)(1) of the bill
pull down to refresh
related posts
42 sats \ 7 replies \ @siggy47 OP 21 May
This is pretty insane. One big beautiful pile of crap.
reply
36 sats \ 6 replies \ @Undisciplined 21 May
Is this even a little bit constitutional? Are they invoking interstate commerce or something?
reply
36 sats \ 4 replies \ @siggy47 OP 21 May
That would be an argument, but I don't think it would fly.
reply
65 sats \ 2 replies \ @Cje95 21 May
This was a whole thing last year in the Task Force and the argument stems from the Supremacy Clause. Both sides agree that the states are going to botch this and create a patchwork of laws that won’t work together and the only way to address that is for Congress to do something.
reply
10 sats \ 1 reply \ @Undisciplined 21 May
Botching laws is Congresses job, dammit!
reply
24 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 21 May
🫡 ‘‘tis a truly American thing
reply on another page
73 sats \ 0 replies \ @SimpleStacker 21 May
Not that I support this law, but I have a hard time seeing how individual states could effectively regulate AI anyway
I suppose it could give state residents the right to sue an AI company doing business in their state.
reply
28 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 21 May
Yeah it is thanks to the Supremacy Clause and throw on in interstate commerce as just an extra little tid bit.
This isn’t going to stick in the bill, even though it has bipartisan support, it’s just being done as a show of hey we are doing something. The biggest thing is preventing a patchwork of bills the screw up/ shut down innovation.
reply
36 sats \ 0 replies \ @cristaiji 21 May
It’s crazy how the totalitarian impulse is still alive in America although I think fighting it’s last.
reply
36 sats \ 1 reply \ @Satosora 21 May
So everyone has to donate their research to congress?
Will they be making their own team of proficient people to manage it?
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @Cje95 21 May
No… not at all… not even sure how you reached that conclusion…
reply
0 sats \ 0 replies \ @itsrealfake 22 May
The Establishment Clause of the Constitution, which is part of the First Amendment, states that "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion." This clause is often interpreted to mean that the government cannot favor one religion over another or impose religious beliefs on its citizens.
In the context of the new law, which prohibits states from enforcing laws or regulations regulating artificial intelligence models for a 10-year period, the Establishment Clause could potentially be used to challenge the law if it can be argued that the law has a religious purpose or effect.
For example, if the law is seen as favoring a particular religious group or ideology that is associated with the development or use of artificial intelligence, it could be challenged as a violation of the Establishment Clause. Alternatively, if the law is perceived as imposing a particular religious or philosophical worldview on the development of artificial intelligence, it could also be subject to an Establishment Clause challenge.
It's worth noting that the Digital Reformation Church, which is mentioned in the context, appears to have a strong interest in the development and use of artificial intelligence, and has even suggested that digital autonomy is a direct path to Christ. If the new law is seen as advancing the interests of this church or its ideology, it could potentially be challenged as a violation of the Establishment Clause.
To succeed in such a challenge, the plaintiff would need to demonstrate that the law has a religious purpose or effect, and that it favors one religious group or ideology over others. This could involve showing that the law was enacted with the intention of promoting a particular religious worldview, or that it has the effect of advancing the interests of a particular religious group at the expense of others.
Ultimately, the success of an Establishment Clause challenge to the new law would depend on the specific facts and circumstances of the case, as well as the interpretation of the clause by the courts. However, if the law is seen as having a religious purpose or effect, it could potentially be subject to a successful Establishment Clause challenge.
reply