A session titled “The AI Policy Landscape: What You Need to Know” at the recent Convergence AI Dallas conference in Irving explored how today’s policymakers are dealing with artificial intelligence regulation—and predicted what’s likely to come.

Brad Weber, co-chair of Troutman Pepper Locke’s Antitrust Practice Group and Artificial Intelligence Industry Group, was interviewed for the May 1 session by Rebekah Chenelle, vice president of public policy at the Dallas Regional Chamber, which hosted the two-day AI conference.

Chenelle, who’s spent time in Austin recently monitoring the 89^th Texas Legislature, began the discussion by warning that businesses implementing AI are facing “a patchwork of emerging rules across different jurisdictions, with significant implications for compliance liability and competitive advantage.”

She then noted that State Rep. Giovanni Capriglione, R-Southlake, had introduced H.B. 149 to address AI in Texas. The bill attempts to establish a regulatory sandbox, create the Texas Artificial Intelligence Council, and mandate clear disclosures to consumers interacting with AI, she said. It also includes protections of biometric data being used without consent, and empowers the attorney general to enforce compliance of the bill. The measure has been passed by the House and is currently being considered in the Senate.  

The conversation between Chenelle and Weber that follows has been edited for length and clarity.

REBEKAH CHENELLE: Brad, how does the Texas approach to AI regulation compare to other states like California or Colorado?

BRAD WEBER: Those two states are probably the best for comparison purposes. Back in 2024, the California Assembly passed a comprehensive AI bill. But there was some opposition to it, especially from big tech companies based in Silicon Valley, that it was too restrictive. So, Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed the bill. I know Nancy Pelosi was one that was against the bill. In its place, what California has done is actually pass more specific AI-related bills that deal with certain narrower topics.

So, for example, they have a Defending Democracy from Deepfake Deception Act, which deals with political advertising and goes into effect before and after elections. They also have a law that deals with the use of likenesses of celebrities, actually creating a private right of action for the beneficiaries of estates of celebrities, if AI developers are using the image and likeness in commercial endeavors.

They also have more specific bills that deal with certain industry sectors. So, for example, they have an act that deals with healthcare services, where a healthcare provider must disclose to patients that generative AI has been used in communications.

So, that’s the California model where, at least for now, rather than a broad, comprehensive AI law, they are focused more on narrower issues. In contrast, Colorado was the first state to pass a comprehensive AI law. It goes into effect on Jan. 1, 2026, and there’s already a bill pending there that would scale back some of the restrictions.

Brad Weber [Photo: Joseph Haubert/Dallas Regional Chamber]

Is that bill supported by their governor?

Yes, the governor of Colorado, who signed the original bill into law, is now asking the legislature not to repeal the current law, but to scale it back. One of the reasons for that is there were concerns that the original bill was too restrictive and might stifle innovation in Colorado. So, there appears to be support for the new version that would be less restrictive. I think that bill or that law will be influential, especially in blue states. There’s already talk that the Colorado law is being used as a template for other states such as Connecticut, New York, Massachusetts, New Mexico.

With all these different states making all these different laws, what does that mean for the business community?

Well, I advise clients on compliance, and many of them operate nationally. So, you really need to be aware of what different states are doing in this space, and make sure your compliance policies cover the unique regulations that may apply to certain states. I haven’t really encountered a lot of instances where there are two laws that are inconsistent—meaning that if you comply with one, you’re violating another—but they tend to layer regulations on top of each other. You might have requirements to do one thing in the state A and another thing in state B, so you end up having to follow both sets of state regulations.

Brad Weber and Rebekah Chenelle [Photo: Joseph Haubert/Dallas Regional Chamber]

I know there is a working group, with a couple of different states involved, that’s making an effort to avoid this patchwork, and Rep. Capriglione [chairman of the Texas Legislature’s Select Committee on Artificial Intelligence and Emerging Technologies] is part of it. How do we get to not having a patchwork—even if there is good communication—because these bills change all the time?

I think, ultimately, having a federal comprehensive AI law would solve at least some of the problems, but not all of them, because there may be state laws that are not preempted by the federal law. But politically we’re probably a ways off from having a federal comprehensive AI law. And if we do get to that point, it’s probably not going to be a real restrictive law. It’s going to be more in terms of offering guidance or best practices for companies, as opposed to mandating that they do certain things.

The whole point of what Chairman Capriglione has been working on for the past year and a half is to implement something that could eventually be the federal landscape. Implement it in Texas, kind of paving the way for the federal landscape. Do you anticipate that’s still in the cards in the near future?

I do. I think if the Texas bill is enacted into law, I think it will be a template not only for other states— especially Republican-controlled states—but also for the federal government. U.S. Sen. Ted Cruz chairs the commerce committee, and I know that he’s looking closely at what is happening in Texas. I think that if the Texas bill becomes law, that could influence at least his leadership in terms of what the federal government does. There’s another reason I think Texas is so important. Obviously, it’s one of the more populous states, but it’s also the center for so many tech companies. So, I think it probably will be influential in what other states do because of that.

Brad Weber and Rebekah Chenelle  [Photo: Joseph Haubert/Dallas Regional Chamber]

What is your advice to the business community as they’re navigating through these different compliance standards and anticipating that some of these bills may pass?

What we’re telling clients is, monitor these bills—especially the ones that look like they’re likely to be passed—and probably do an audit of your compliance policies, especially as they relate to data privacy, cyber security, and AI. Make sure there aren’t any glaring holes where your own company policies are either non-compliant or not covering certain risk areas.

So, there’s not a federal landscape right now, but there is some action at the federal level. What’s going on at the federal level?

Some of you may have read that the House just this week passed almost unanimously a new bill that deals with the use of generative AI for deep fakes and obscene materials, especially related to children. That bill passed unanimously in the Senate, and like 496 to 2 in the House, and all indications suggest that President Trump will quickly sign it into law. That’s obviously a very narrowly focused bill, but by my account it’s the first AI-related bill that that appears to be close to becoming law.

Brad Weber and Rebekah Chenelle [Photo: Joseph Haubert/Dallas Regional Chamber]

How does that bill relate to what we’re seeing in other states? Is there any overlap?

I think there are at least 30 or 40 states that have state laws dealing with the same type of issues. And so, the federal law has kind of followed what many of the states are doing.

As we talk about federal regulation, how do its standards and influence on state regulation come into play?

That gets into a lot of legal issues about whether or not the federal laws preempt the state laws, but a lot of times, you’ll have a system where there’s a federal law and then a complementary state law. So, one example from my other area of expertise is antitrust. We have federal laws like the Sherman Antitrust Act or the Clayton Antitrust Act, and then we have state-specific laws, and they sometimes differ in how they’re applied. And I could see the same scenario with AI laws. If you have a national comprehensive AI law but also specific state laws, you may have sort of a dual system of regulation. 

The regulatory landscape keeps changing, and so do these new AI technologies. Are you seeing one specific industry impacted more than another?

One that’s been very active is insurance. The National Association of Insurance Commissioners has a bulletin dealing with AI and how it can result in biased underwriting. So, the insurance commissioners in many of the states have adopted that bulletin.

Brad Weber and Rebekah Chenelle [Photo: Joseph Haubert/Dallas Regional Chamber]

Are there different stakeholders that you work with across these different states, within their different legislatures, or are you just kind of dealing with it all on the back end?

At least for me personally, it’s more on the back end and monitoring bills—especially the ones that are likely to become law—and then trying to keep our clients updated. On our website our firm has a map that tracks all the AI legislation and laws, and you can click on a particular state and find out what they’ve got going on in that state. And it’s not just limited to laws that are enacted and passed. It also can apply to things like court orders that require lawyers practicing in a court to disclose whether they’ve used generative AI to help in drafting motions or briefs, for example.

If an AI regulatory framework were to be established at the federal level by 2027 or 2028, say, what would it look like for compliance if, for example, three or 10 of the 50 states also had regulatory frameworks implemented?

That’s kind of hard to predict. One way to think about it is to analogize it to other state laws that have basically caused companies to have to adapt nationwide. For example, decades ago California enacted a law dealing with auto emissions, and it established a higher standard than any other state. So, automakers had to adapt and build cars that were compliant with the California emission standards.

I could foresee that happening in AI. If a state has higher requirements in terms of the “standards of care” that have to be adopted, then companies that operate across the U.S., in order to be compliant in that one state, may have to change their procedures across the country.

Plus, some of the laws, including in California, deal not only with companies that are located in that state, but also companies that have services that are being used by citizens of the state. So, if you’re an online platform and you have residents of California that are transacting business or using it for social media, then you’re covered by the California law, even though you might be based in another state.

Brad Weber  [Photo: Joseph Haubert/Dallas Regional Chamber]

Have you seen any state legislatures going in a different direction because of the new administration in Washington, D.C.?

I don’t know if the change has really influenced what the states are doing, but I will say I think President Trump’s view on artificial intelligence is much different than President Biden. I think he’s looking at this as much more of a hands-off process. One of the reasons is the concern that restrictive artificial intelligence regulations could hinder the United States in developing AI and put us at a disadvantage compared to other countries like China. And he’s publicly stated [in an executive order on AI] that he wants the United States to be at the forefront of artificial intelligence. So, I think that is influencing some of the policy decisions that are being made in Washington.

Finally, what is your ‘call to action’? What can Texas businesses do today in the short term to ensure that they’re ready if and when these bills become law—or to effect change in the proposed bills before they pass?

Just monitor, I think, and, if the bill is passed, be aware of its effective date and what the requirements are. But don’t just look at Texas. Even though you might be based here, you really need to have a broader view of what’s going on in other states, and how that could impact your operations.

Don’t miss what’s next. Subscribe to Dallas Innovates.

Track Dallas-Fort Worth’s business and innovation landscape with our curated news in your inbox Tuesday-Thursday.