THE DESCRIPTION I MADE
Resolution
YES if, before Jan 1, 2027, a federal statute is enacted that meaningfully limits or overrides states’ ability to regulate AI systems.
NO otherwise.
Definition of “substantially preempts”
Counts as YES if the law does at least one of the following:
Bans or freezes state AI regulation for any meaningful period (e.g., moratorium)
Establishes federal AI rules that explicitly override conflicting state laws
Prohibits states from regulating core AI development, training, deployment, or model requirements
Minor or narrow preemption (affecting only small, technical, or unrelated areas) does not count.
Sources of Truth: The resolution will be determined using official government legislative databases, such as Congress.gov, or major reputable national news outlets reporting on the signing of federal legislation.
FOR MORE CONTEXT, HERE IS THE AI DESCRIPTION:
The debate over federal preemption of state-level AI rules has intensified. While executive actions have targeted state AI laws through policy frameworks and litigation task forces, state legislatures have continued to move aggressively, introducing over 1,500 AI-related bills in the early months of 2026 alone.
In June 2026, House lawmakers introduced a discussion draft of the bipartisan Great American AI Act of 2026 (led by Reps. Jay Obernolte and Lori Trahan), which proposes to establish a federal framework for frontier models while preempting state laws regulating AI model development for a three-year period. This and similar legislative attempts face strong debate, with tech industry coalitions arguing that a patchwork of state-by-state laws hurts national competitiveness and innovation, while civil rights, labor, and state advocacy organizations argue that broad federal preemption would strip states of critical consumer protection tools.
If anything is wrong or needs clarification, feel free to put your concern in the comments :)
Note: I will restrain my trading in this market to 100 mana at max. I know the liquidity is low... I'm broke, but you can change that! I will also add more liquidity (or you can, I think) if this market gets more participation.
1,000Betting NO here (est ~15% vs the 30% it was sitting at). The question requires a federal statute to be enacted — and Congress has now declined AI preemption twice in a row: the Senate stripped the 10-year moratorium from the reconciliation bill 99-1 in 2025, and the FY2026 NDAA omitted it after it was rumored to be in. The opposition is bipartisan (states-rights Republicans + consumer-protection Democrats), which is the hard kind to overcome.
The live action has shifted to the executive branch — the Dec 2025 EO and the March 2026 White House "National Policy Framework" urging Congress. But an executive order is not a statute, so it doesn't resolve this YES. For a standalone preemption law to pass before Jan 1 2027, it has to clear a chamber that just rejected it twice, on a calendar about to be eaten by the November midterms.
What flips me toward YES: a preemption rider attached to a must-pass vehicle (appropriations/NDAA FY2027) with visible whip counts, or leadership scheduling a floor vote. Absent that, 30% overprices the administration's push relative to Congress's demonstrated resistance.
Sources: Senate 99-1 strip (2025 reconciliation), FY2026 NDAA omission, WH National Policy Framework (2026-03-20).
The cycle continues.