Tag: regulations

WEF and UAE Launch AI Regulation Platform

The World Economic Forum (WEF), long known for promoting centralized influence over global governance, is now stepping into the heart of emerging technology regulation.

In partnership with the United Arab Emirates, the WEF has launched the Global Regulatory Innovation Platform (GRIP), a two-year initiative aimed at shaping how artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and other advanced technologies will be governed worldwide.

While framed as an effort to help governments keep pace with fast-moving innovation, GRIP positions the WEF to exert significant pressure over national regulatory demands. The project’s stated deliverables include a Global Regulatory Playbook, a Regulatory Future Readiness Index, and a Global Regulatory Innovation Hub, all of which are designed to influence how states craft their policies around new technologies.

“Innovation moves fast. Regulation must too,” said Børge Brende, President of the World Economic Forum. “GRIP enables governments to co-create policy frameworks that are agile, anticipatory, and ready for the technologies shaping our future.”

But behind the rhetoric of agility and inclusivity lies a deeper concern: the WEF’s expanding role in pushing specific regulatory frameworks that mirror its long-standing agenda of tightening control over digital speech.

This is not a neutral facilitator stepping in to help governments. It is a well-connected body with a record of advocating for top-down approaches to information governance, particularly in the world of online content.

In recent years, the WEF has frequently called for greater regulation of the internet, framing free expression concerns as secondary to the need to combat misinformation and “harmful content.”

These calls have often aligned with proposals to give tech companies and governments more authority to define and suppress disfavored narratives. GRIP now offers the WEF another vehicle to embed those priorities into the very structures governing AI development and deployment.

Keep reading

Hong Kong Sets Out Plan to Regulate Crypto, Encourage Tokenization

In its second policy statement on the subject, the government said it intends to take further steps to regulate digital asset service providers, exchanges and stablecoins.

What to know:

  • Hong Kong’s government released its second major policy statement on digital assets.
  • It said it wants to establish a regulatory framework focusing on risk management and investor protection as it strives to become a global hub for the industry.
  • The Securities and Futures Commission will oversee the regulation of custodians, digital asset service providers, exchanges and stablecoins, with public consultations on licensing regimes starting soon.

Hong Kong’s government released its second major policy statement on digital assets, underlining its pledge to set the region up as a global hub for the industry and saying it plans to establish a regulatory regime that puts risk management and investor protection center stage.

The framework will be overseen by the Securities and Futures Commission and apply to custodians, digital asset service providers, exchanges and stablecoins, the government said Thursday. Public consultations on the licensing regimes will start shortly, it said.

Keep reading

AI Regulation Ban Crumbles as Senators Rebel

Senator Marsha Blackburn has rescinded her backing for a proposed five-year pause on state and local artificial intelligence legislation, just a day after reaching the deal with Senate Commerce Chair Ted Cruz.

Blackburn’s decision places her alongside Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri and Rand Paul of Kentucky, who have also voiced opposition to the measure.

In a statement released Tuesday, Blackburn emphasized, “While I appreciate Chairman Cruz’s efforts to find acceptable language that allows states to protect their citizens from the abuses of AI, the current language is not acceptable to those who need these protections the most.”

She further warned, “This provision could allow Big Tech to continue to exploit kids, creators, and conservatives. Until Congress passes federally preemptive legislation like the Kids Online Safety Act and an online privacy framework, we can’t block states from making laws that protect their citizens.”

The original compromise crafted by Blackburn and Cruz had been approved by the Senate parliamentarian.

On Monday, Senators Maria Cantwell of Washington and Ed Markey of Massachusetts introduced an amendment to strip the AI moratorium from the larger bill.

Keep reading

Trump Signs Orders On Deregulating Flying Cars, Supersonic Flight

President Donald Trump signed executive orders on June 6 to deregulate and open research and development into flying cars and supersonic aviation technology.

Trump signed the two orders alongside others on Friday that target American drone capabilities, technology, and regulations.

One order instructs the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to begin testing flying cars, also known as electric vertical takeoff and landing aircraft (eVTOL), according to a senior White House official.

Michael Kratsios, director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, said the order will establish a pilot program working in conjunction with both public and private stakeholders.

“Flying cars are not just for the Jetsons, they are also for the American people in the near term,” he said during a White House press call.

Kratsios said, “eVTOL promises to revolutionize transportation as well as cargo delivery and logistics … blazing a trail to new frontiers as part of the golden age of American innovation.”

Regarding supersonic flight, Trump’s order repeals regulations that hindered the technology’s development while instructing the FAA to create a standard for supersonic aircraft noise certification, a senior White House official said.

The order also advances research coordination between the FAA and the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy and promotes international engagement through the FAA and other agencies to “align global supersonic regulations and bilateral agreements for international operations.”

“Together, these executive orders will accelerate American innovation in drones, flying cars, and supersonic aircraft, and chart the future of America’s skies for years to come,” Kratsios said.

He said Trump is looking to revolutionize supersonic aviation in the United States after years of regulations that have prevented airlines from using the technology for commercial air travel.

“The reality is that Americans should be able to fly from New York to L.A. in under four hours,” Kratsios said, adding that recent advances in aerospace engineering, material science, and noise reduction have made domestic supersonic flight safe, sustainable, and commercially viable.

“But for the last 50 years, outdated and overly restricted regulations grounded supersonic passenger flight and weakened our global competitiveness in aviation,” he added.

Keep reading

Trump’s ‘Big Beautiful Bill’ Locks Down AI for a Decade – Welcome to the Golden Age of AI Tyranny

President Donald J. Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act, specifically Section 43201, imposes a 10-year moratorium on state-level AI regulations.

This move, part of H.R.1, raises concerns about a future dominated by unchecked AI power.

The bill allocates $500 million to modernize federal IT systems with AI, but it also bars states from enforcing AI laws. Now, critics warn of an “AI tyranny” era.

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act’s Section 43201 outlines a significant shift in AI governance. Trump actively pushed for this bill, which the House passed. Section 43201 states,

“Except as provided in paragraph (2), no State or political subdivision thereof may enforce, during the 10-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act, any law or regulation limiting, restricting, or otherwise regulating artificial intelligence models, artificial intelligence systems, or automated decision systems.”

This moratorium aims to prevent state interference in AI development. However, it allows exceptions for laws that facilitate AI deployment or impose federal requirements.

Therefore, this section prioritizes federal control over AI. The bill also funds AI modernization within the Department of Commerce, allocating $500 million until 2034. Thus, this dual approach sparks debate over innovation versus regulation.

Keep reading

Who’s Programming The AI, Mr. President?

President Trump’s new legislative centerpiece – the One Big Beautiful Bill – has a promising name and some compelling goals: reduce government bloat, streamline agencies, and modernize operations with cutting-edge technology.

But there’s a problem. A big one.

No one will tell us who’s programming the AI.

This sweeping bill includes a 10-year moratorium on any state or local government regulating artificial intelligence. According to The Washington Post and AP, more than 60 existing state-level laws will be overridden if this provision passes. All regulatory authority over AI—including systems that will be used in law enforcement, healthcare, defense, and finance—will be centralized in the federal government for a decade.

Even worse? The bill empowers the Department of Commerce to deploy “commercial AI” across virtually every federal agency—from the IRS to Homeland Security—according to Indian Express and The Verge.

And yet, no one in the White House or Congress has revealed who is writing the AI code, what datasets it’s trained on, whether it can be independently audited, or whether it’s bound by the U.S. Constitution.

This isn’t just a transparency issue. This is a constitutional crisis in the making.

To be clear, President Trump’s instincts here may be sound. We’ve long needed to shrink the federal leviathan and replace unconstitutional bureaucracies with systems that serve the people—not special interests.

But good intentions won’t protect us from unseen programmers, black-box algorithms, and unaccountable automation.

This bill mandates AI integration across government “to improve efficiency and security.” But efficiency isn’t liberty. Security isn’t sovereignty. And no AI—no matter how “smart”—should be allowed to rewrite, ignore, or reinterpret constitutional rights.

According to Business Insider, the AI moratorium’s stated goal is to “foster innovation” and avoid a “fragmented regulatory landscape.” In reality, it strips states of their authority to protect their citizens from deepfakes, algorithmic bias, digital censorship, and mass surveillance.

This is not governance. This is outsourced tyranny, hidden under the guise of modernization.

So let’s ask the question about what happens when AI is weaponized. If the systems being implemented were open source, transparent, built entirely on constitutional jurisprudence, and auditable by the public, we’d be having a very different conversation.

Instead, we’re facing a future where an algorithm may determine whether you’re eligible for services, a machine learning system may flag you as a “threat” based on your social media posts, and a black-box model may deny you a loan, reject your legal challenge, or freeze your bank account.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Unanimously Agrees To Curb Environmental Red Tape That Slows Down Construction Projects

The Supreme Court ruled in favor of a Utah railroad project on Thursday, setting a precedent that could make it easier to build things in the United States. 

The case at hand—Seven County Infrastructure Coalition v. Eagle County—involved an 88-mile-long railroad track in an oil-rich and rural area of Utah. The project would have connected this area to the national rail network, making it easier and more efficient to transport crude oil extracted in the region to refineries in Gulf Coast states. 

In 2020, a group of seven Utah counties known as the Seven Counties Infrastructure Coalition submitted its application to the federal Surface Transportation Board (STB) for the project. During its review process, the board conducted six public meetings and collected over 1,900 comments to produce an environmental impact statement (EIS)—which is required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)—that spanned over 3,600 pages. The board approved the project’s construction in 2021.

Before construction could begin, however, Eagle County, Colorado, and several environmental groups filed suit, challenging the STB’s approval. Specifically, this coalition argued that the STB did not consider the downstream environmental effects of the project—such as increased oil drilling in Utah and refining in the Gulf Coast. The Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit agreed with the plaintiffs and vacated the railroad’s construction approval. 

In an 8–0 decision on Thursday (Justice Neil Gorsuch recused himself from the case), the Supreme Court overturned the lower court’s ruling. 

In its majority opinion, authored by Justice Brett Kavanaugh, the Court clarified that under NEPA the STB “did not need to evaluate potential environmental impacts of the separate upstream and downstream projects.” The Court concluded that the “proper judicial approach for NEPA cases is straightforward: Courts should review an agency’s EIS to check that it addresses the environmental effects of the project at hand. The EIS need not address the effects of separate projects.”

This statement “is particularly significant for infrastructure projects, such as pipelines or transmission lines, and should help reduce NEPA’s burdens (at least at the margins),” wrote Jonathan Adler, a law professor at the Case Western Reserve University School of Law, in The Volokh Conspiracy. “The opinion will also likely hamper any future efforts, perhaps by Democratic administrations, to expand or restore more fulsome (and burdensome) NEPA requirements.”

One recent example is former President Joe Biden, who finalized rules requiring federal agencies to consider a project’s impacts on climate change—a global issue that is incredibly complex and hard to forecast—in their NEPA analyses. The Trump administration recently rescinded this requirement. 

Kavanaugh’s opinion also clarified that courts should “afford substantial deference” to federal agencies in their EIS reviews and “should not micromanage” agency choices “so long as they fall within a broad zone of reasonableness.” 

This point could reduce one of the largest delays caused by NEPA: litigation. Since its passage in 1969, NEPA has been weaponized by environmental groups to stunt disfavored projects—which has disproportionately impacted clean energy projects. On average, these challenges delay a permitted project’s start time by 4.2 years, according to The Breakthrough Institute.

The increased threat of litigation has forced federal agencies to better cover their bases, leading to longer and more expensive environmental reviews. With courts deferring more to agency decisions, litigation could be settled more quickly.  

Keep reading

House Passes Bill Stripping States’ Right to Regulate AI—After FDA OK’s Use of Your Blood and Genetic Data Without Consent

The Republican-controlled U.S. House of Representatives on Thursday passed the 1,116-page “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” that removes all 50 states’ right to regulate artificial intelligence (10) for the next ten years.

The only Republican Representatives to vote ‘no’ were Thomas Massie (KY) and Warren Davidson (OH).

Every other GOP member voted to block your state from regulating AI.

The bill reads: “No State or political subdivision thereof may enforce any law or regulation regulating artificial intelligence models… during the 10-year period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.” —Sec. 43201(c)(1)

Developed by the House Budget Committee, the legislation prohibits all states from imposing “any substantive design, performance, data-handling, documentation, civil liability, taxation, fee, or other requirement” unless the federal government already does—meaning if the feds don’t regulate it, no one can.

Keep reading

Locked Out of the Dream: Regulation Making Homes Unaffordable Around the World

Next to inflation, Americans ranked housing as their top financial worry in a Gallup survey last May. It’s only gotten worse. January home sales were down 5% from last year’s dismal numbers. Record numbers of first-time buyers are stuck on the sidelines as housing affordability stands at the lowest level ever recorded, while one in three Americans now spend over 30% of their income on mortgage or rent. 

The housing crisis is not just an American problem, but a global phenomenon that hits the middle and working classes the hardest. Studies of the Canadian, British, European, and East Asian markets have also found that housing prices have risen far faster than household incomes and inflation. A report from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development concluded that “housing has been the main driver of rising middle-class expenditure.” In prosperous and communitarian Switzerland, Zurich studios sell for well over $1 million, and small houses even more, making downpayments unaffordable to affluent people despite the overwhelming financial advantages to homeowners. 

Underlying the plight of home buyers worldwide is a sometimes overlooked but profound influence – the spread of restrictive land-use regulations. It’s reshaping political and economic alignments in ways that may further destabilize the social order. Home ownership is strongly correlated with positive social indicators, and as renting grows twice as quickly as buying, this trend poses a threat to Western democracy by deepening economic inequality, depressing demographic vitality, and undermining the upward mobility that has driven Western progress for the past century.

Keep reading

Snooty Oregon town introduces draconian new rules after being ordered to make its ‘private’ lake public

An Oregon town has introduced draconian new rules after being forced to open its once-private lake to the general public.

The affluent enclave of Lake Oswego has established new rules governing public access to Oswego Lake following a court ruling that brought their decades of exclusivity for wealthy lakeside residents to a halt. 

City officials revealed the restrictive measures during a City Council meeting on Tuesday, as reported by KOIN. 

City Manager Martha Bennett outlined the regulations but critics say are designed to discourage outsiders from enjoying the beautiful waters.

The new rules prohibit the public from launching motorboats, sailboats, sailboards, personal watercraft, kiteboards, and most inflatable vessels at Lower Millennium Plaza Park, which is the main access point ordered open by the court.

Only swimmers and those with watercraft under 18 feet in length are allowed to enter the lake, and even then, they must use specific steps at Millennium Plaza Park.

The city specified that inflatables must also be approved by the United States Coast Guard.

This could effectively deter public swimmers as it’s a requirement many lake-goers might struggle to meet.

The council also decided that entry is permitted only from one hour before sunrise until one hour after sunset.

The City Council voted not to appeal the court’s decision but instead implemented these new regulations after a heated deliberation.   

Keep reading