The federal government faces a widening policy gap on artificial intelligence as the Trump administration resists new regulations while internal personnel conflicts and judicial rulings destabilize key executive agencies.
The federal government’s approach to artificial intelligence remains a study in institutional inertia. Despite activity in committee rooms and private fundraisers, the United States lacks a comprehensive federal statute to govern the technology. This legislative vacuum has left oversight scattered across a patchwork of agencies, including the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), each attempting to stretch existing authorities to cover algorithmic risks. While the FTC maintains an enforcement-first posture, the EEOC has focused on its AI and Algorithmic Fairness Initiative to address employment discrimination.
The absence of a centralized framework reflects a deliberate posture from the executive branch. President Trump has largely declined to engage in calls for a new regulatory regime, prioritizing technological dominance over precautionary constraints. This was underscored on September 2, 2026, when the administration backed OpenAI in its copyright battle with the New York Times, arguing that training large language models is generally protected by fair use. This position places the White House in direct opposition to legacy media institutions who view the technology as a threat to intellectual property.
This hands-off approach has drawn sharp criticism from former President Barack Obama, who recently urged Democratic leaders to elevate AI oversight to a central party pillar. Obama warned that the technology could prove dangerous without urgent management, pressing House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries to develop a public framework. The former president’s intervention highlights a growing partisan divide: a Democratic push for proactive safety standards versus a Republican preference for sector-specific enforcement under current consumer and civil rights laws. Meanwhile, Senate negotiators continue to weigh piecemeal bills, such as the AI LABS Act, which fail to address broader systemic risks.
Beyond the digital frontier, the administration faces significant internal turbulence. On September 2, 2026, Army Secretary Dan Driscoll announced his resignation following months of conflict with Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth. This departure coincides with unrest in the Senate, where Republican Thom Tillis has called for Hegseth’s removal, citing inept management. Hegseth recently drew fire for removing at least six Army officers from a promotion list to two-star generals, a move critics view as an unnecessary politicization of the military hierarchy. These shifts occur as Senate Majority Leader John Thune expresses concern over the Republican majority, citing high prices and low approval ratings.
The administration’s efforts to reshape the administrative state have also hit legal roadblocks. A federal judge recently ruled that a Department of Homeland Security plan to reduce FEMA staff by 50% was unlawful. The court concluded that such a reduction would fundamentally hinder the agency’s ability to respond to disasters, protecting the workforce from executive contraction without congressional approval. This ruling, coupled with the success of the No Surprises Act—which HaloMD reports has reduced out-of-network emergency spending by 52%—underscores the complex interplay between executive directives and statutory mandates.
As the 2026 legislative session continues, the tension between executive directives and constitutional limits remains palpable. Whether addressing the future of psychedelic medicine at the HHS or the renaming of the Strait of Hormuz, the administration continues to challenge established norms. However, the lack of a unified AI policy and friction within the Department of Defense suggest that the struggle for executive control remains far from settled.
Miles Harrington serves as the Senior Correspondent for Federal Systems & Executive Power at Just Right News, where he brings a disciplined, constitutionalist lens to the inner workings of the American government. With a focus on the mechanics of the federal bureaucracy and the limits of executive authority, Harrington has established himself as a vital voice for readers who value transparency, accountability, and the preservation of the separation of powers.
A native of Richmond, Virginia, Harrington’s perspective is deeply rooted in the traditions of the Old Dominion. Growing up in a city defined by its historical significance and its role as a center of American jurisprudence, he developed an early appreciation for the foundational principles of the Republic. His upbringing in Richmond—a place where the legacy of the Founding Fathers is woven into the landscape—instilled in him a belief that the federal government should remain within its constitutional bounds. This background informs his skepticism of centralized overreach and his commitment to reporting on the ways in which the administrative state impacts the lives of everyday citizens.
In his current role, Harrington specializes in the complexities of federal systems. He doesn’t just report on the headlines of the day; he digs into the structural shifts within the executive branch that often go unnoticed by the mainstream press. Whether he is analyzing the implications of a new federal regulation or investigating the expansion of agency jurisdiction, his work is characterized by a rigorous adherence to the facts and a dedication to the rule of law.
Harrington is perhaps best known for his signature feature series, “How Washington Works.” Through this ongoing project, he demystifies the often-opaque processes of the nation’s capital, pulling back the curtain on the “Deep State” and the unelected officials who wield significant influence over national policy. By breaking down complex legislative maneuvers and executive orders, he empowers Just Right News readers to understand the true levers of power in Washington. His reporting serves as a necessary check on the federal government, ensuring that the actions of those in power are held up to the light of public scrutiny.
Now based in Washington, D.C., Harrington operates at the epicenter of the political world, yet he remains intentionally distanced from the “Beltway bubble.” His proximity to the halls of power allows him to maintain a robust network of sources across the federal landscape, but his heart remains in the principled conservatism of his Virginia roots. He views his role not merely as a reporter, but as a steward of the public trust, dedicated to providing the clarity and context that conservative voters need to navigate an increasingly complex political environment.
Through his sharp analysis and unwavering commitment to the truth, Miles Harrington continues to be a cornerstone of the Just Right News team. His work ensures that the principles of limited government and executive restraint remain at the forefront of the national conversation, providing a crucial service to those who believe in a government that is truly of, by, and for the people.