(Illustration via Pixabay by geralt)

AS ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE races forward with lightning speed, Congress is scrambling to catch up. Members of Congress on both sides of the aisle have proposed various bills to address the growing dangers of AI. The latest attempt comes from Massachusetts Rep. Lori Trahan, who is proposing a bill that would block states, including Massachusetts, from legislating protections against AI-related harms.

With workers at the center of the greatest technological transformation of the modern era, this is a bad deal for Massachusetts workers and communities already fighting for greater economic opportunity and racial equity.

Companies today are already using AI tools to screen resumes, monitor workers, track productivity, cut pay, and fire workers. In some industries, workers may not even know when an algorithm is influencing decisions that affect their paycheck or future career opportunities. The real-world biases are already being observed.

An AI hiring tool popular with many companies was recently found to be biased against Black and Asian applicants. The study that looked at 4 million job applications in 11 business sectors found that the tool discriminated against Black applicants 25 percent of the time and Asian applicants 15 percent of the time.

Another study revealed that three open-source large language models from three different companies favored white-associated names over Black-associated names. Looking at 120 first names associated with white and Black men and women, the LLMs ranked white-associated names higher 85 percent of the time versus Black-associated names 9 percent of the time.

Without clear safeguards, AI risks entrenching racial biases and shifting even more power toward employers while leaving workers with fewer protections, less transparency, and little recourse when automated systems make mistakes.

For communities of color, which have historically faced discrimination in hiring, compensation, and workplace advancement, these concerns are particularly alarming.

State legislatures are trying to get ahead of these types of harms because Congress has done nothing.

State Sen. Michael Moore and State Rep. Tricia Farley-Bouvier recently warned Trahan against supporting federal preemption legislation, arguing that states need room to respond as AI evolves. They understand something Congress too often forgets: States are where a lot of the real policy innovation happens first. Massachusetts, in particular, has never waited around for Washington to get its act together. Whether on civil rights, health care, climate, or workers’ rights, our state has a rich history of moving first when federal lawmakers stalled.

The same is true for AI, where Massachusetts is emerging as a national leader in enacting regulations aimed at protecting people from AI’s dangers.

In 2024, Attorney General Andrea Campbell issued guidance making clear that companies developing, selling, or using AI systems must comply with Massachusetts consumer protection, anti-discrimination, and data privacy laws. And this year, the Massachusetts House became one of the first legislative chambers in the nation to pass legislation regulating AI-generated political ads and deceptive election communications.

But Massachusetts is not alone. States across the country are advancing proposals to address children’s protections, AI-enabled discrimination, deepfakes, and other harms.

These efforts are practical responses to a technology that is rapidly changing daily life while federal lawmakers remain gridlocked.

A sweeping federal preemption law would freeze all that progress, preventing Massachusetts and other states from filling the gaps left by Congress. At a moment when AI technology is evolving faster than the federal government’s ability to regulate it, stripping states of their authority would not create smart policy. It would create a regulatory vacuum that primarily benefits large technology companies seeking weaker oversight and fewer accountability measures.

Instead of tying the hands of states, Rep. Trahan should work with her colleagues to create a meaningful floor for national AI protections, not a ceiling that blocks states from doing more. For workers, that means requiring transparency when AI is used to make decisions about hiring, salaries, scheduling, and firing. It also means ensuring states retain the ability to respond to civil rights concerns, workplace discrimination, and the needs of communities most impacted by these technologies.

Rep. Trahan should reject any proposal that strips Massachusetts of its ability to protect residents from AI harms. The question now is whether workers, communities of color, and state governments will have a meaningful voice in shaping the rules and protecting people from harm.

Rahsaan Hall is president and CEO of the Urban League of Eastern Massachusetts.