Governing AI R&D: A Legal Framework for Constraining Dangerous AI

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2509.05361v1
• Date: Wed, 03 Sep 2025 19:09:06 GMT
• Title: Governing AI R&D: A Legal Framework for Constraining Dangerous AI
• Authors: Alex Mark, Aaron Scher,
• Abstract summary: Lawmakers may seek to restrict the development and release of AI models or of AI research itself.<n>We investigate three classes of potential litigation risk for AI regulation in the U.S.: the First Amendment, administrative law, and the Fourteenth Amendment.<n>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.
• Score: 0.0
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• 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.

Related papers

• (When) Should We Delegate AI Governance to AIs? Some Lessons from Administrative Law [0.0]
  Advanced AI systems are now being used in AI governance.<n>Using AI for governance risks serious harms because human practitioners may not be able to understand AI decisions.<n>This paper begins to develop a principled framework for when to delegate AI governance to AIs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-09-24T14:50:37Z)
• Beware! The AI Act Can Also Apply to Your AI Research Practices [2.532202013576547]
  The EU has become one of the vanguards in regulating the digital age.<n>The AI Act specifies -- due to a risk-based approach -- various obligations for providers of AI systems.<n>This position paper argues that, indeed, the AI Act's obligations could apply in many more cases than the AI community is aware of.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-06-03T08:01:36Z)
• Ethical Challenges of Using Artificial Intelligence in Judiciary [0.0]
  AI has the potential to revolutionize the functioning of the judiciary and the dispensation of justice.<n>Courts around the world have begun embracing AI technology as a means to enhance the administration of justice.<n>However, the use of AI in the judiciary poses a range of ethical challenges.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-27T15:51:56Z)
• AI threats to national security can be countered through an incident regime [55.2480439325792]
  We propose a legally mandated post-deployment AI incident regime that aims to counter potential national security threats from AI systems.<n>Our proposed AI incident regime is split into three phases. The first phase revolves around a novel operationalization of what counts as an 'AI incident'<n>The second and third phases spell out that AI providers should notify a government agency about incidents, and that the government agency should be involved in amending AI providers' security and safety procedures.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-03-25T17:51:50Z)
• Using AI Alignment Theory to understand the potential pitfalls of regulatory frameworks [55.2480439325792]
  This paper critically examines the European Union's Artificial Intelligence Act (EU AI Act) Uses insights from Alignment Theory (AT) research, which focuses on the potential pitfalls of technical alignment in Artificial Intelligence. As we apply these concepts to the EU AI Act, we uncover potential vulnerabilities and areas for improvement in the regulation.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-10T17:38:38Z)
• Public Constitutional AI [0.0]
  We are increasingly subjected to the power of AI authorities.<n>How can we ensure AI systems have the legitimacy necessary for effective governance?<n>This essay argues that to secure AI legitimacy, we need methods that engage the public in designing and constraining AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-06-24T15:00:01Z)
• Securing the Future of GenAI: Policy and Technology [50.586585729683776]
  Governments globally are grappling with the challenge of regulating GenAI, balancing innovation against safety. A workshop co-organized by Google, University of Wisconsin, Madison, and Stanford University aimed to bridge this gap between GenAI policy and technology. This paper summarizes the discussions during the workshop which addressed questions, such as: How regulation can be designed without hindering technological progress?
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-21T20:30:01Z)
• Particip-AI: A Democratic Surveying Framework for Anticipating Future AI Use Cases, Harms and Benefits [54.648819983899614]
  General purpose AI seems to have lowered the barriers for the public to use AI and harness its power. We introduce PARTICIP-AI, a framework for laypeople to speculate and assess AI use cases and their impacts.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-21T19:12:37Z)
• The risks of risk-based AI regulation: taking liability seriously [46.90451304069951]
  The development and regulation of AI seems to have reached a critical stage. Some experts are calling for a moratorium on the training of AI systems more powerful than GPT-4. This paper analyses the most advanced legal proposal, the European Union's AI Act.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-03T12:51:37Z)
• Managing extreme AI risks amid rapid progress [171.05448842016125]
  We describe risks that include large-scale social harms, malicious uses, and irreversible loss of human control over autonomous AI systems. There is a lack of consensus about how exactly such risks arise, and how to manage them. Present governance initiatives lack the mechanisms and institutions to prevent misuse and recklessness, and barely address autonomous systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-26T17:59:06Z)
• AI Regulation in Europe: From the AI Act to Future Regulatory Challenges [3.0821115746307663]
  It argues for a hybrid regulatory strategy that combines elements from both philosophies. The paper examines the AI Act as a pioneering legislative effort to address the multifaceted challenges posed by AI. It advocates for immediate action to create protocols for regulated access to high-performance, potentially open-source AI systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-10-06T07:52:56Z)
• Both eyes open: Vigilant Incentives help Regulatory Markets improve AI Safety [69.59465535312815]
  Regulatory Markets for AI is a proposal designed with adaptability in mind. It involves governments setting outcome-based targets for AI companies to achieve. We warn that it is alarmingly easy to stumble on incentives which would prevent Regulatory Markets from achieving this goal.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-06T14:42:05Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.