America’s fragmented state AI regulations threaten military readiness, risking innovation delays as China races ahead with centralized AI strategies for future warfare dominance.
On the frontlines of Ukraine, cheap quadrotor drones powered by artificial intelligence (AI) are shaping battle outcomes in real time. US commanders know the same technology could decide the next conflict in the Pacific. But while Beijing fuels its military with centralized AI adoption, America risks tying itself in knots with a patchwork of state-level laws.
America’s AI Patchwork Problem
Across the United States, state legislators have introduced over 1,000 artificial intelligence bills this year alone. California, New York, Illinois, and Colorado are racing to regulate AI on their own, creating a maze of overlapping and often contradictory state mandates. Many of these efforts are driven by fears that AI could destabilize labor markets and widen inequality, but experts warn this fractured approach “could undermine the nation’s efforts to stay at the cutting edge of AI innovation.”
This isn’t just an economic issue. It is a matter of operational readiness. At the operational level of war (OLW)—the bridge between national strategy and tactical execution—commanders rely on AI to analyze intelligence, assess logistics, and synchronize joint operations. The future of war will have predictive logistics to keep ships resupplied, targeting software that fuses intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) feeds, and attritable drone swarms all flowing into the hands of commanders. Every layer of red tape at home is a weapon handed to Beijing, and the longer we tolerate fragmented AI policy, the more we risk eroding America’s combat power.
Fragmented Laws Hurt the Battlefield
The consequences are not abstract. A Pacific Fleet commander could be unable to resupply forward-deployed ships because predictive logistics programs were delayed by compliance costs. A Joint Task Force commander in US Central Command could watch drone programs stall while an adversary deploys swarms at scale. Cyber teams defending the Department of War (DOW) networks could be stuck with outdated systems because open-source innovators were buried under 50-state compliance regimes. That is the battlefield cost of fragmented state AI policy.
Many proposals mimic the European Union’s precautionary approach, piling on heavy red tape. Kevin Frazier and Adam Thierer note that such rules “decimated innovation and investment in Europe.” The United States cannot afford the same mistake of burying itself under a “safety blanket made of red tape” while adversaries integrate AI into contested cyber networks and strategic planning systems.
China’s authoritarian model is incompatible with US liberty, but currently, Beijing’s unified tech strategy gives it a strategic edge. Beijing has linked AI to its concept of “intelligentized warfare,” where decision-making speed and autonomy are decisive. America’s internal divisions, by contrast, risk slowing our innovation engine at the wrong time. Rep. Brett Guthrie (R-KY) warns that America must not “regulate like Europe or California” because that would put us “in a position where we’re not competitive.” He is right. A fragmented state-by-state approach could allow China to surge ahead while US military superiority erodes across every domain of conflict.
The Federal Debate Is Heating Up
Earlier this summer, federal lawmakers debated a federal AI moratorium that would have blocked state and local governments from enforcing any AI regulations for ten years. The House passed it, but the Senate stripped it out in a stunning 99–1 vote after bipartisan populist backlash. That fight showed the stakes—either America sets one clear federal policy, or we let 50 states pull the country in opposite directions.
Not every state is throwing up roadblocks. Utah’s AI Policy Act created the nation’s first AI policy office, favoring sandboxes and voluntary safety partnerships over blanket bans and licenses. As Utah’s Governor Spencer Cox put it, “we don’t have to choose between innovation and safety. With the right structure, we can have both.” That is the model America should amplify.
I’ve said before, “Companies won’t stick around to navigate costly new compliance regimes; they’ll pack up and leave for states where AI isn’t a dirty word.” This patchwork could exacerbate the issue on a global scale, driving AI development overseas to China and other nations, where unified policies enable their AI sector to flourish while America’s diminishes.
One Nation, One Policy
A handful of aggressive state regulators must not be allowed to dictate America’s AI future. The only way forward is a light-touch federal framework for high-risk uses with permissionless innovation as the default for everything else. Without it, fragmented regulation will fracture America’s lead in the technologies of tomorrow, and even one state could hamstring the whole country.
If America fails to unify its AI policy, we risk entering the next fight with outdated tools while our adversaries surge ahead. Wars are won and lost on the speed of innovation. Congress must act now to keep our innovators free to build the technologies that will keep our sailors, soldiers, airmen, and marines alive—and our nation secure.
About the Author: Devin McCormick
Devin McCormick is a YoungVoices contributor and Tech and Innovation Policy Analyst at the Libertas Institute. Follow him on X @DevinMcCormick0. His views are his own and do not represent the Department of War.
Image: dee karen/shutterstock
