The US has no centralised federal regulator specifically dedicated to AI. Instead, federal oversight of AI remains distributed across multiple agencies and advisory bodies. For example, the Trump Administration’s December 2025 EO pushed a national policy framework and strategies to challenge state AI laws but did not suggest the need for a new regulator to oversee such efforts; it relies instead on existing agencies and officials.

Similarly, most states do not charge a single agency with oversight or responsibility for AI-related matters. A growing number of states have adopted AI-specific statutes that embed regulatory or enforcement authority in existing agencies or frameworks, such as consumer protection, and that sometimes designate specialised oversight bodies in particular market sectors.

For example, Colorado’s AG will enforce the State’s new automated decision-making technology law under the Colorado Consumer Protection Act, with no private right of action, and the Texas Attorney General has exclusive authority to enforce the Texas Responsible AI Governance Act (TRAIGA); Utah, meanwhile, has designated oversight through its Department of Commerce and an emerging Office of AI Policy. New York’s RAISE Act will create a new agency, within a larger, existing one, to implement that law. At the local level, New York City’s Local Law 144 assigns enforcement to NYC’s Department of Consumer and Worker Protection (DCWP).

In other states, AGs are actively leveraging existing consumer protection, privacy, and anti-discrimination laws to investigate and enforce against AI-related harms. In addition to engaging AGs, several states have empowered consumer protection agencies or other regulatory bodies to oversee AI-related compliance, resulting in a decentralised enforcement landscape where responsibilities vary by jurisdiction.