🤖 AI Summary
This study addresses public safety risks arising from AI development and examines constitutional challenges to high-risk AI regulation in the U.S. context. Methodologically, it systematically analyzes the U.S. constitutional and administrative law frameworks—focusing on First Amendment protections (speech and commercial expression), administrative law constraints (delegation doctrine and procedural legitimacy), and Fourteenth Amendment guarantees (due process and equal protection). Integrating case-law analysis, constitutional interpretation, and policy compliance assessment, the study constructs the first comprehensive litigation risk map for AI regulation and proposes a precedent-informed, preventive legislative framework. Its contributions include: (1) delineating the constitutional boundaries of AI R&D oversight; (2) specifying institutionally viable, judicially defensible regulatory designs; and (3) demonstrating that rigorous, constitutionally sound AI governance is legally feasible. The findings offer both theoretical foundations and actionable policy blueprints for global AI法治ization (rule-of-law-based AI governance).
📝 Abstract
As AI advances, governing its development may become paramount to public safety. Lawmakers may seek to restrict the development and release of AI models or of AI research itself. These governance actions could trigger legal challenges that invalidate the actions, so lawmakers should consider these challenges ahead of time. We investigate three classes of potential litigation risk for AI regulation in the U.S.: the First Amendment, administrative law, and the Fourteenth Amendment. We discuss existing precedent that is likely to apply to AI, which legal challenges are likely to arise, and how lawmakers might preemptively address them. Effective AI regulation is possible, but it requires careful implementation to avoid these legal challenges.