A week after the White House unveiled its long-awaited national AI legislative framework, Washington has renewed momentum to pass federal laws but no roadmap on how to get there.

Why it matters: The administration's loose AI playbook for Congress is exposing cracks beneath the GOP's apparent consensus.

What they're saying: At the Axios AI+DC Summit this week, attendees grumbled about a lack of clarity in the copyright section of the framework as Republican members of Congress showcased diverging opinions on AI's impact on voters and kids.

• White House Office of Science and Technology Policy director Michael Kratsios struck a hopeful tone about Congress getting something done, even as disagreements about how far Congress should go threaten to stall progress.
• When asked if the goal is to have Congress send a bill to the president's desk this year, he said: "Yes, we want to try to get it as expeditiously as possible."

Take, for instance, the different ways that Rep. Kat Cammack (R-Fla.) and Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) reacted to Meta and YouTube being found liable in a Los Angeles court for making their products addictive.

• When asked if the ruling should influence how any AI bill treats kids' online safety, Cammack said that "I don't think that this is the bombshell that everyone thinks that it is."
• Instead, she called it "more of a level-setter" as lawmakers try to reconcile the differences between the House and Senate approaches to kids' online safety.
• Hawley, in contrast, called the verdict "hugely significant" and said it's time for Congress to take action to ban AI chatbots for minors.
• "These juries just said no amount of profit justifies destroying a child's life," he said. "It'd be nice if the United States Congress maybe got on the same page."

Zoom in: Key sticking points include:

• Kids' online safety: Republicans are split over whether to hold platforms liable for harms or pursue lighter-touch rules focused on transparency and parental controls.
• Copyright: They're divided over how to protect creators as AI firms train on copyrighted material, and the White House wants to leave it up to the courts.
• Data centers: They're searching for a path forward as they face growing local backlash over energy and land use as the White House calls on Congress to shield households from higher power bills.

Friction point: It's possible Republicans lose some political control after the midterms, but Democrats have their own divides.

• Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) at the summit called a proposal from Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) to pass a moratorium on building AI data centers "idiocy."

What we're watching: Some Democrats are trying to sharpen the party's AI message, including Rep. Josh Gottheimer (D-N.J.), who co-chairs the House Democratic Commission on AI.

• "Our job is to put together the Democratic perspective on AI in the House of Representatives and the legislative agenda," he said at an event hosted by SeedAI in Washington this week.
• "I'm hoping we win the House in a few months and we'll be governing next year. And so it's very important that we have put forward a clear perspective and a legislative agenda."

A federal judge yesterday paused the Trump administration's designation of Anthropic as a supply chain risk, marking an early legal victory for the embattled company.

Why it matters: Anthropic argued that the designation was causing immediate and irreparable harm as business partners rethink their contracts and federal agencies remove Claude.

• The preliminary injunction gives Anthropic relief from ongoing reputational damage and provides greater certainty for commercial partners, the company says.

State of play: U.S. District Judge Rita Lin granted Anthropic the preliminary injunction on Thursday.

• A parallel case is ongoing in a D.C. court.
• Anthropic is arguing in both proceedings that the Pentagon is violating the First Amendment and procurement law.
• The Pentagon has argued in court that Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth's and President Trump's online posts don't have legal standing and therefore there's no irreparable harm taking place.

Lin wrote in her order that nothing in the governing statute regarding the supply chain risk designation "supports the Orwellian notion that an American company may be branded a potential adversary and saboteur of the U.S. for expressing disagreement with the government."

What they're saying: "We're grateful to the court for moving swiftly, and pleased they agree Anthropic is likely to succeed on the merits," an Anthropic spokesperson said.

• "While this case was necessary to protect Anthropic, our customers, and our partners, our focus remains on working productively with the government to ensure all Americans benefit from safe, reliable AI."

Meta's court losses this week are adding urgency to lawmakers' push to pass legislation that could reshape how social media platforms are designed.

Why it matters: Plaintiffs in New Mexico and Los Angeles successfully tested a new legal theory that treats social media more like products that can cause harm — rather than protected speech — and chips away at tech's long-standing liability shield.

Catch up quick: A jury in New Mexico this week ordered Meta to pay $375 million after finding that the company violated state law by misleading users on safety and failing to protect children.

• The trial's second phase will start on May 4, and that could lead to design changes, such as effective age verification, ending encrypted messages on WhatsApp and a court-appointed child safety monitor to ensure compliance.
• In California, a jury this week found Meta and YouTube negligent in a landmark social media addiction trial. This case is tied to more than 2,000 other pending lawsuits, meaning the monetary penalties could add up quick.

The big picture: The White House emphasized kids' online safety in its pitch to Congress on how to tackle AI, but left the details up to lawmakers.

Keep reading.

Here's our guide to catch you up on the AI policy news you may have missed this week:

👀 Chip watch: The House Foreign Affairs Committee voted 42-0 yesterday to send the Chip Security Act to the House floor

• The bipartisan bill is aimed at preventing advanced U.S. AI chips from reaching China and other adversarial nations.
• Context: The Justice Department last week charged three people, including the co-founder of Super Micro Computer, with diverting $2.5 billion worth of servers with Nvidia AI chips to China. The Trump administration also recently gave the green light to sell some AI chips to China.

🤖 AI transparency push: Reps. Don Beyer (D-Va.), Mike Lawler (R-N.Y.) and Sara Jacobs (D-Calif.) introduced the AI Foundation Model Transparency Act yesterday.

• The bipartisan legislation would require developers of major AI systems to disclose how their models are trained, what data they use, and how they function.

💬 New chatbots bill: Sen. Ed Markey (D-Mass.) introduced the Youth AI Privacy Act, legislation that would require AI companies to "implement privacy safeguards in their AI chatbots," per a release.

• AI chatbots would be prohibited from showing ads to minors, required to disclose they're not human, and barred from using addictive features like push alerts.

💼 AI czar news: White House crypto and AI czar David Sacks has run out his time as a special government employee but says he'll continue advising the president on AI policy.