“The US has done almost nothing legislatively about the risks of AI (aside from deepfake porn).”
Our reading, the sentence that was checked:
The US has passed almost no legislation addressing AI risks, apart from deepfake porn.
Assessment: Unresolved Evidence as of
Where and when Gary Marcus wrote it
Marcus on AI, The “AI 2027” Scenario: How realistic is it?, paragraph 7.
- Said
- Source observed
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence as of
- the cutoff for this assessment
- Assessment recorded
- assessment marcus-the-ai-2027-scenario-how-realistic-2e330d-a2
We recorded 40 claims from this post. See every claim from this post.
The wording above is the version this site observed on 2026-10-28. The source may have been edited after 2025-05-22. This page does not claim the wording was captured then.
What the claim commits to
- Kind
- Observation
- Deadline, as the speaker wrote it
- None stated. This site does not add one.
- Deadline state when assessed
- No horizon
- Deadline state on 2026-10-29
- No horizon (the release’s reference date)
Conditions
- aside from deepfake porn (qualifier, stated by the speaker)
From the speaker
- The US
- has done almost nothing legislatively
- about the risks of AI
- aside from deepfake porn
Our interpretation
- Read 'the US' primarily as the federal government, consistent with the screening questions. The words could also encompass state governments.
- Read 'almost nothing' as very limited substantive legislative protection, not literally zero enactments.
- Count enacted requirements addressing AI risks, including government procurement and use. Exclude executive orders, voluntary commitments, proposed bills, and deepfake-pornography provisions.
- The claim concerns the cumulative legislative record through the post date. No starting date is supplied.
Counts as supported if: The enacted federal record outside deepfake pornography contains only isolated, narrowly scoped AI-risk protections.
Counts as contradicted if: The enacted federal record contains substantial protections addressing AI risks across multiple important activities, even without a comprehensive AI law.
Retrospective: these criteria were written after the outcome was public.
Current assessment
Was it true for the period described?
Outcome: Unresolved
The record was checked, and the evidence available by the cutoff does not settle it.
Scored on a plain reading. The speaker named no measure for this claim, so it was judged on the reading an informed reader would take, stated below under our interpretation. Both reviews had to find that reading fair.
- Evidence as of
- Deadline state when assessed
- No horizon
- Assessment recorded
- Policy version
- 2026-10-28.7
Rationale
The AI Training Act, enacted October 17, 2022, required a federal workforce training program covering AI risks, including discrimination and privacy [e2]. The June 4, 2025 CRS report describes targeted federal provisions and no broad AI regulatory legislation, but it postdates the May 22 claim [e1]. Colorado enacted an AI law on May 17, 2024, with attorney-general enforcement authority, making the federal-versus-state scope consequential [e3]. These items do not establish whether cumulative federal protections through May 22, 2025 amounted to 'almost nothing' [e1–e3].
Limitations
- The evidence items do not provide a complete inventory of federal protections enacted through May 22, 2025.
- The later CRS overview provides context, not a contemporaneous inventory.
- The evidence does not establish a threshold for 'almost nothing' or settle whether state legislation belongs in the comparison.
- Enactment does not establish implementation or practical effectiveness.
Evidence (3 items)
Context only: Congressional Research Service, reproduced by EveryCRSReport,
No federal legislation establishing broad regulatory authorities
Why it matters here: The report distinguishes the absence of broad regulation from existing targeted laws. Its later snapshot is context, and absence of a comprehensive framework does not itself establish 'almost nothing.'
- Where
- Summary
- Publisher
- Congressional Research Service, reproduced by EveryCRSReport
- Kind of source
- Secondary summary
- Describes events of
- Public from
Context only: U.S. Government Publishing Office,
capabilities and risks associated with AI.
Why it matters here: Congress enacted mandatory acquisition-workforce training covering discrimination, privacy, and risk mitigation. This is a concrete exception outside pornography, but one targeted law cannot alone disprove 'almost nothing.'
- Publisher
- U.S. Government Publishing Office
- Kind of source
- Regulatory filing
- Describes events of
- Public from
Context only: Colorado General Assembly,
exclusive authority to enforce, the requirements of the act.
Why it matters here: Colorado enacted enforceable protections concerning algorithmic discrimination, including risk-management and impact-assessment duties. This is outside the federal reading but material to the broader reading of 'the US'; enactment and the scheduled compliance date are distinct.
- Publisher
- Colorado General Assembly
- Kind of source
- Regulatory filing
- Describes events of
- Public from
What would settle it
An authoritative inventory of laws enacted through May 22, 2025, with analysis of their coverage and obligations outside deepfake pornography, assessed against an explicit substantive threshold and a specified federal-only or federal-and-state scope.
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the sources this register covers.
: Marcus on AI, The “AI 2027” Scenario: How realistic is it?
The US has done almost nothing legislatively about the risks of AI (aside from deepfake porn).
- Where
- paragraph 7
- Published
- 2025-05-22
- Source observed
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Assessment versions
- Assessment marcus-the-ai-2027-scenario-how-realistic-2e330d-a2: Current. Outcome: Unresolved. Evidence as of 2026-10-28. Public date not recorded.
Recorded events
Assessment publishedBy this site
First assessment published after both reviews and the final-text check passed.
About assessment marcus-the-ai-2027-scenario-how-realistic-2e330d-a2.