On June 2, 2026, in a rapidly evolving federal AI policy landscape, President Trump signed a new Executive Order (EO) titled Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security (the “June Order”). This EO establishes new cybersecurity mandates and a voluntary framework for the secure deployment of frontier AI models. It also reinforces the administration’s position that AI innovation must not be stifled by excessive regulation.
This alert summarizes the June Order’s key provisions, explains how it builds on a related December 2025 Executive Order on federal preemption of state AI laws, and offers practical guidance for business clients.
Background
The June Order follows several AI-related actions since January 2025. On the first day of his second term in office, President Trump revoked President Biden’s 2023 AI safety order (EO 14110). Three days later, he issued an order promoting U.S. AI leadership and directing development of an AI Action Plan. On December 11, 2025, he signed another order (the “December Order”), targeting state-level AI regulation and proposing federal preemption of inconsistent state laws, despite there still being no comprehensive federal AI law.
Key Provisions of the June Order
The June Order focuses squarely on cybersecurity and national security dimensions of advanced AI. Its principal provisions include:
- Upgrading Federal Cyber Defenses. The EO directs multiple federal agencies (including U.S. Department of Homeland Security through the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, the Department of War, and the Treasury Department) to prioritize cybersecurity of government information systems within 30 days. This includes establishing or expanding AI-enabled defensive tools and facilitating access to cybersecurity services for state and local authorities and critical infrastructure operators.
- Secure Frontier Model Deployment. Within 60 days, the National Security Agency, in consultation with other agencies, must develop a classified benchmarking process to assess the advanced cyber capabilities of AI models and designate which models qualify as “covered frontier models.” The EO then establishes a voluntary framework through which AI developers may engage the government to determine if their models meet this threshold, provide pre-release access (up to 30 days before release to trusted partners), and collaborate on secure innovation. Importantly, the June Order explicitly states that it does not create any licensing, preclearance or permitting requirement for AI model development or distribution.
- AI Cybersecurity Clearinghouse. The U.S. Department of the Treasury is directed to form a voluntary framework, in collaboration with AI developers and critical infrastructure operators, to coordinate vulnerability scanning, discovery and patch remediation.
- Criminal Enforcement Against AI-Enabled Attacks. The Attorney General is directed to prioritize enforcement of the Computer Fraud and Abuse Act and other federal criminal statutes against individuals who use AI to unlawfully access computer systems or employ AI agents in furtherance of criminal activity.
Connection to the December 2025 Order
The June Order complements the December Order’s focus on regulatory architecture. Where the December Order addressed preemption of state-by-state regulation, the June Order hardens cybersecurity infrastructure.
The December Order’s core premise remains highly relevant. The underlying message is that existing federal laws are sufficient to address AI-related concerns, reducing the need for fragmented, state-by-state rules.
The December Order directed the Attorney General to create an AI Litigation Task Force to challenge state AI laws, required the Secretary of Commerce to evaluate which state laws conflict with federal policy, and called for legislative recommendations establishing a uniform federal AI framework that would preempt inconsistent state regulation. The June Order builds on this foundation by showing how the federal government intends to fill the regulatory space it has claimed, specifically through cybersecurity coordination, criminal enforcement, and public-private collaboration rather than prescriptive compliance regimes.
What This Means for Your Business
- For AI Developers and Technology Companies. While the June Order explicitly avoids mandating pre-release review, the institutional infrastructure it establishes (classified benchmarks, pre-release access windows, a “trusted partners” tier) may evolve into de facto compliance expectations. Companies developing advanced AI models should evaluate whether early engagement with this framework aligns with their competitive and intellectual property strategies.
- For Startups and Emerging Companies. The administration’s continued emphasis on federal preemption of state AI regulation may be welcome news for early-stage companies navigating compliance obligations. As noted in the December Order: “State-by-State regulation creates a patchwork of 50 different regimes, making compliance more challenging, especially for start-ups.”
A uniform federal standard, if ultimately enacted through legislation, would significantly reduce the compliance burden for resource-constrained companies of all sizes. However, until courts rule or Congress acts, state laws (including Colorado’s new AI law and California’s AI Transparency Act) will be enforceable.
Looking Ahead
The federal AI regulatory landscape remains in flux. States like California and Colorado will likely push back against federal preemption; several state attorneys general have already signaled opposition. Legal challenges to the December Order’s framework are expected. The June Order’s practical impact will depend in part on how aggressively agencies implement its 30- and 60-day directives, and whether the voluntary frontier model framework attracts meaningful industry participation. Whether Congress coalesces around a federal framework, particularly in a midterm election year, remains to be seen.
Our Data Privacy and Technology Transactions teams are actively monitoring these developments and advising clients across the AI value chain on compliance strategy, regulatory risk and transactional considerations. If you have questions about how the June Order or broader AI developments may affect your business, please reach out to Chiara Portner or your regular Lathrop GPM attorney.