吃瓜大本营

This case asks whether, in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court鈥檚 holding in Students for Fair Admissions, Inc. v. Harvard College, a university may refuse to administer a privately funded scholarship set aside for Black students majoring in the physical sciences and redirect those funds to first-generation students instead. The district court denied the University鈥檚 petition to do so, and the case is now on appeal before the Iowa Supreme Court. The Court鈥檚 decision could have significant implications for other private scholarships that address the lasting effects of segregation.  

From protecting your privacy to ensuring new technology accounts for inclusivity, ACLU experts explain what鈥檚 at stake in the AI policy sphere and the steps advocates and lawmakers can take to regulate AI

WASHINGTON 鈥� Today, President Trump issued an executive order attacking state regulation of artificial intelligence (AI). The order builds on the administration鈥檚 previous efforts, including its 鈥淎I Action Plan,鈥� which directed agencies to ensure that AI development is 鈥渦nencumbered.鈥� The order directs federal agencies to withhold funding from states if they enact regulations that are more than 鈥渕inimally burdensome.鈥� It also establishes a task force to file lawsuits against states鈥� AI regulations and threatens to withhold critical broadband funding. In response, Cody Venzke, senior policy counsel with the American Civil Liberties Union, issued the following statement: 鈥淧resident Trump鈥檚 executive order doubles down on a dangerous policy that the Republican-led Congress has rejected not once, but twice: displacing states from their critical role in ensuring that AI is safe, trustworthy, and nondiscriminatory. Bipartisan groups of governors, attorneys general, and lawmakers have opposed these efforts for good reason: Although AI might bring substantial benefits, it also carries substantial risks, and America will not win the AI 鈥榬ace鈥� if the AI used by the government, employers, schools, and health care providers is hallucinatory, unreliable, and dangerous. For this reason, it is no surprise that the first attempt at attacking state AI laws was defeated in a landslide 99-1 vote in the Senate. 鈥淢oreover, the executive order is not just dangerous, it鈥檚 unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has made clear that the president may not unilaterally and retroactively change the conditions on federal grants to states after the fact. Each of those grants are an agreement between states and the federal government, and threatening to withhold funds for schools, broadband buildout, nutritional support, and more for unrelated AI policy fights will unnecessarily harm the American people.鈥�

By supporting the AI Civil Rights Act of 2025, Congress can take a monumental step to protect our civil rights in the digital age.