Cronyism: DC's Selective Enforcement of Preemption (Net Neutrality v AI)
Federalism is the form of government in which we are supposed to be engaged:
“(The) mode of political organization that unites separate states or other polities within an overarching political system in a way that allows each to maintain its own integrity….
“(T)he federal relationship must be established or confirmed through a perpetual covenant of union, usually embodied in a written constitution that outlines the terms by which power is divided or shared….
“(T)he political system itself must reflect the constitution by actually diffusing power among a number of substantially self-sustaining centres. Such a diffusion of power may be termed noncentralization.
“Noncentralization is a way of ensuring in practice that the authority to participate in exercising political power cannot be taken away from the general or the state governments without common consent.”
The United States Constitution severely restricts what the federal government is supposed to do. By specifically delineating what the fed gov is supposed to do.
And then the 9th and 10th Amendments kick in:
“[Ninth Amendment] The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.
“[Tenth Amendment] The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
These amendments mean:
If the fed gov ain’t specifically empowered to do X? It ain’t supposed to do X. ALL of those non-delineated powers “are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
Which means the US’s federal government should be REALLY small.
Of course: As a constitutional federalist (please pardon the redundancy)? I acknowledge there are some things for which the federal government is responsible.
On those things? The States should defer.
But this is DC. And whether or not to properly adhere to the Constitution and federalism? Is just another thing to sell-out to DC’s Big Business cronies.
The World Wide Web - and its regulation - is a quintessential example of this duplicitous inanity.
I have since its inception said the World Wide Web is an obvious federal government responsibility. Because it is the WORLD Wide Web.
The US should have one, unified, FEDERAL policy. With which to best mesh with the rest of the planet and their Internet policies.
If different US states have different Internet policies? Things quickly get extraordinarily messy.
Oh: And it eviscerates the Constitution’s Commerce Clause:
“(A)n enumerated power listed in the United States Constitution (Article I, Section 8, Clause 3). The clause states that the United States Congress shall have power ‘to regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes.’”
The fed gov must engage in WORLD Wide Web “Commerce with foreign Nations.” So the Web is its purview - preempting the States.
But DC is owned and operated by Big Tech. So DC chooses to enforce or not enforce its Internet purview? Predicated upon whatever is best for their Big Tech paymasters.
The quintessential one-two-punch example? Net Neutrality laws - and Artificial Intelligence (AI) laws.
First: Net Neutrality law.
Big Tech LOVES Net Neutrality. In no small part because it outlaws their being charged for the MASSIVE bandwidth they use. We the Sheeple pay WAY more for our Internet connections - so as to augment Big Tech’s MASSIVE profits.
DC has dutifully spent the last decade-plus repeatedly (and unsuccessfully) trying to jam Net Neutrality down our throats. At first, briefly, via our elected Congress. Followed by a decade-plus of repeated, unsuccessful-and-illegal attempts by the unelected Federal Communications Commission (FCC).
Having perpetually failed at the federal level, Big Tech was more than happy to take piecemeal wins in the states. Leftist states - led by (shocker) California - have imposed their varying versions of Net Neutrality.
This is CLEARLY a violation of the Commerce Clause. And its attending federal preemption.
Except DC has never seriously asserted its preemption authority on Net Neutrality. Because its Big Tech paymasters don’t want them to do so.
Then there’s Artificial Intelligence (AI) law.
Big Tech, of course, wants ZERO limits on its AI efforts.
DC has dutifully done nothing to pass any limits upon Big Tech’s AI.
So ALL of the states have begun (again, illegally) acting on behalf of We the Humans:
“More than 1000 bills introduced in 50 states in the 2025 legislative session spanning a variety of issues….”
And DC - in defense of its Big Tech paymasters? Has suddenly, instantaneously and repeatedly rediscovered its Constitutional Internet purview - and its federal preemption.
Congressional Republicans Propose 10-Year Ban on State AI Laws
Except nigh-universal objection from We the Humans caused this…
Senate Leaders Water Down 10-Year State AI Law Ban
DC denies Big Tech nothing, so just a little later….
Senate Advances State AI Law Pause Proposal, Now Cut to 5 Years
The Donald Trump Administration is Big-Tech-owned-and-operated as well, so…:
“For months, Trump has pressured the Republican-led Congress to block state AI laws….”
And Congressional Republican “leaders” are doing their level best to get it done…:
“House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) told reporters Tuesday that a sect of Republicans is now ‘looking at other places’ to potentially pass the measure.”
Again: I am all for federal preemption of state AI laws. Just as I am all for federal preemption of state Net Neutrality laws.
Because I am a CONSISTENT, Constitutional federalist.
My point is: DC is not consistently, Constitutionally federalist.
DC has done more to preempt state AI laws in 2025? Than it has done to preempt state Net Neutrality laws in the last fifteen years.
Instead, DC has been as hyperactive in its efforts to impose Net Neutrality law? As it has been with its AI law blockade.
And the OBVIOUS reason for all of this?
DC’s Big Tech paymasters want Net Neutrality law.
And they don’t want AI law.