Currently, artificial intelligence (AI) is “regulated” in the US by a patchwork of state laws. Although President Trump has issued two Executive Orders related to AI, Executive Order 14179 of January 23, 2025 Removing Barriers to American Leadership in Artificial Intelligence and Executive Order 14365 of December 11, 2025 Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence, a comprehensive federal regulatory framework does not yet exist. That being said, Executive Order 14365 Section 2 sets forth US policy with respect to AI: “It is the policy of the United States to sustain and enhance the United States’ global AI dominance through a minimally burdensome national policy framework for AI.”

Executive Order 14365 directs the Attorney General to establish an AI Litigation Task Force “whose sole responsibility shall be to challenge State AI laws inconsistent with the policy set forth in section 2 of this order.” As stated in the order [Executive Order 14365]: “My Administration must act with the Congress to ensure that there is a minimally burdensome national standard—not 50 discordant State ones.” This of course begs the question, what does a “minimally burdensome national standard” for AI look like? In a recent Wall Street Journal Opinion piece, To Regulate AI, Follow the Cfius Model, Michael Faulkender and Robert Wilkie, both of America First Policy Institute’s Center for American Prosperity, propose an answer – a model based on the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS).

CFIUS is a multi-agency committee consisting of: the Secretary of the Treasury (chair); the Secretaries of State, Defense, Homeland Security, Commerce, and Energy; the Attorney General; the U.S. Trade Representative; and the Director of the Office of Science and Technology Policy. The Secretary of Labor and the Director of National Intelligence (DNI) are nonvoting, ex officio members. CFIUS reviews transactions that could result in foreign entities controlling US businesses where such control might impact US national security, in particular, transactions related to critical technology, critical infrastructure or sensitive personal data. CFIUS advises the president on whether to block or restrict a transaction based on national security implications. Violating CFIUS can result in severe civil penalties as well as the related transaction being unwound. CFIUS for AI could be granted a similar mandate and authority.

Those interested in this topic might want to read Messrs. Faulkender and Wilkie’s Wall Street Journal opinion piece at: WSJ 04 August 2026, Page A 15.