House Reconciliation Bill’s AI Provisions Prompt Debate Over Scope of State Preemption
Kristian Stout, Director of Innovation Policy at ICLE is quoted in this Inside AI Policy article about the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s reconciliation legislation on the usage of AI in federal data system. Read the full story here.
At the same time, International Center for Law and Economics director of innovation policy Kristian Stout offers a restrained view on the impacts from the legislation’s state preemption provisions.
“Generally speaking, I think the language reflects the needs of the moment,” says Stout in a statement provided to Inside AI Policy.
“There is a lot of interest in regulating AI, but not a lot of understanding what exactly is being regulated. A moratorium of some sort is called for just to give lawmakers some breathing room to actually study and understand what is being developed and deployed.”
“Further, as I read the language, it would not preempt laws of general applicability that happen to apply to AI and non-AI in the same way,” Stout adds.
“So, if AI is being used to commit crimes or torts, or what have you, laws can still be written and enforced to deal with actual discovered harms,” according to Stout.