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 diffusing power among a number of substantially self-sustaining centers. 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 U.S. Constitution severely restricts what the federal government is allowed to do by specifically delineating the federal government’s powers.
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 national government is not specifically empowered to do X, it is not supposed to do X. All those non-delineated powers “are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
This means the federal government should be very 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 internet and its regulations are a quintessential example of this duplicitous inanity. Since its inception, I have said the internet is an obvious federal government responsibility because it is worldwide in nature.
The United States should have one national policy with which to best mesh with the rest of the world and their internet policies. If different states have different internet policies, things quickly get extraordinarily messy.
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 federal government must engage in internet “Commerce with foreign Nations.” 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 them being charged for the massive bandwidth they use. We the Sheeple pay way more for our internet connections to augment Big Tech’s massive profits.
DC has dutifully spent the past 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 varying versions of Net Neutrality.
Clearly, this is a violation of the Commerce Clause. And it’s attending federal preemption. Except DC has never seriously asserted its preemption of 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, 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….”
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 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 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 past 15 years. Instead, DC has been as hyperactive in its efforts to impose Net Neutrality law as it has been with its AI law blockade.
The reason for all of this is that DC’s Big Tech paymasters want Net Neutrality law, and they don’t want AI law.
The Article was first published at LessGovernment.Org
