One Federal AI Rule? What a Nationwide Framework Could Mean for Government Teams
The federal government is weighing a single regulatory framework for artificial intelligence. The President signaled plans to issue an executive order that would replace a patchwork of state rules with one national standard. Public debate is already active, with new lawsuits and industry responses adding pressure to act.
What's on the table
A unified federal framework would set baseline requirements for AI use across agencies and vendors. Expect clarity on risk management, data governance, testing and evaluation, transparency, and reporting. If preemption is included, state-level AI mandates could be superseded or aligned under federal guidelines.
Why this matters for government work
Fragmented rules slow procurement and create compliance gaps. One standard can simplify vendor oversight, speed up contract reviews, and improve accountability. It also makes cross-agency collaboration easier-same definitions, same documentation, same audit expectations.
Copyright and data use are front and center
Major news organizations, including The New York Times and the Chicago Tribune, have sued AI startup Perplexity, alleging unauthorized use of news content. Regardless of the case outcome, the signal is clear: verify content licensing, sources, and model training claims from vendors. Government communications, public records, and data-sharing agreements should be reviewed for AI reuse and derivative works.
What agencies can do now
- Map current AI use: systems in production, pilots, and shadow tools used by staff.
- Adopt a risk tiering model: low, moderate, high impact-tie controls to risk level.
- Tighten vendor requirements: model cards, data sources, evaluation results, red-team findings, incident logs.
- Protect data: clarify retention, de-identification, fine-tuning limits, and outbound data protections.
- Review copyright exposure: licensing, terms, and acceptable use for content and datasets.
- Stand up an AI review board: legal, privacy, security, civil rights, records, and program owners.
- Prepare for audits: document decisions, risk tradeoffs, and mitigation steps-keep it repeatable.
Federal vs. state: coordination still matters
Even with a federal rule, state partners and grantees will keep their own constraints. Build templates that meet the strictest shared standard you face. Use MOUs and contract clauses to align expectations across agencies and tiers of government.
Procurement playbook to reduce risk
- Require pre-award disclosures: training data provenance, model lineage, known limitations, and evaluation scope.
- Set performance gates: bias testing thresholds, hallucination rates, accessibility, and uptime SLAs.
- Log usage: prompts, outputs, and human-in-the-loop checkpoints for high-risk tasks.
- Plan exits: clear off-ramps, model switching clauses, and data portability.
What to watch next
- Text of the executive order: preemption language, timelines, and enforcement leads.
- NIST alignment: how agencies map to the AI Risk Management Framework and test methods.
- Copyright guidance: how fair use, licensing, and derivative works are treated for AI systems.
- Vendor claims: stronger scrutiny of "trained on" and "does not retain" assertions.
Helpful resources
Build team capability
If your unit needs practical AI policy and risk training organized by role, see this curated catalog: AI courses by job. It's useful for orienting program staff, privacy officers, and procurement leads on the same baseline.
Bottom line: a single federal rule could cut friction and raise the floor on safety and transparency. Use this moment to lock in your inventory, controls, and contracts so you're ready the day guidance drops.
Your membership also unlocks:
