When the new Trump administration repealed a restrictive Biden era executive order on artificial intelligence (AI) and praised AI opportunity at a global summit, it proclaimed a new era of permissionless innovation on the horizon across the United States. Some state legislatures, however, seemed to have missed the memo, advancing restrictive AI bills at a rate that far outpaces the already significant load of 2024—threatening U.S. leadership and flourishing along the way.

In 2024, 634 AI-related bills were introduced, according to a tracker from Multistate. The same tracker indicates that over 800 legislative instruments have been introduced this year, and it’s only March. They vary greatly from state to state: one proposal might place restrictions on the development process that prevents the same technology from complying with a different state’s requirements. To say this could lead to a patchwork would be an understatement; “chaos” seems more fitting.

In an analysis of this phenomenon, the American Consumer Institute concluded that the onslaught of legislation is an act of “irresponsible collaboration” that is creating a menacing mismatch of laws focused on regulation. The surge in AI bills signals a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the technology, the free market, and what meaningful leadership looks like.

Instead of achieving the stated goal of ensuring that the technology is a help and not a hindrance, lawmakers are preventing innovators from improving their product because of onerous and conflicting regulations. Those in favor of AI development are taking a different approach by establishing frameworks that encourage innovation and learning both how and where AI can be useful.

In Texas, the Texas AI Freedom Act (TAIFA) takes the latter approach. The goal of TAIFA is to eliminate barriers to progress and remove burdens that make it difficult for innovators to improve the technology so that it better meets the needs of the market. Similarly, our own state, Louisiana, has demonstrated a deep commitment to AI leadership by establishing a division focused on innovation.

Both TAIFA and the Louisiana Innovation Division speak to a truth becoming increasingly evident: an AI strategy that aims to stifle is no strategy at all.

Often, a false dichotomy is drawn between regulation of AI or total inactivity. Policymakers can be proactive about the technology without limiting its potential benefits and crippling developers by creating a system that prioritizes AI opportunities and actively eliminates red tape.

The success of American AI has implications that extend far beyond the tech sector. Technology is vital to our economy, national security, and industries from medicine to education. AI leadership is vital and achievable, if states will choose to participate in rather than limit its progress.