Trump’s Regulatory Freeze: What CISOs Need to Know About Cybersecurity & AI Law Changes

The Trump administration’s recent regulatory freeze is a longstanding practice used by incoming presidents to reassess and align regulatory actions with their policy goals. This freeze pauses the implementation of new rules and mandates a review of pending regulations, impacting a wide range of sectors, including cybersecurity and artificial intelligence. For Chief Information Security Officers (CISOs), this development is noteworthy as it complicates the regulatory situation they must navigate to ensure compliance and manage risks effectively. The freeze affects key cybersecurity frameworks and AI governance policies, potentially altering the trajectory of innovation and compliance requirements.

Introduction to Regulatory Freezes

Regulatory freeze actions are a strategic tool employed by incoming administrations to pause and review recent regulatory activities, ensuring they align with new policy priorities. This practice has been a consistent feature of presidential transitions, with past administrations, including those of Biden, Obama, George W. Bush, and Clinton, implementing similar freezes. Typically, these actions are initiated through directives from the President’s Chief of Staff, serving as a mechanism to halt the issuance of new rules and withdraw those pending publication. The objective is to provide the new administration with the opportunity to scrutinize and potentially reshape regulatory frameworks across various sectors. The recent freeze by the Trump administration, however, was directly issued by President Trump, marking a departure from tradition. This move underscores a more direct approach to regulatory oversight, reflecting the administration’s intent to reassess and potentially change existing and proposed regulations to better fit its strategic goals.

Trump Administration’s Recent Freeze

The Trump administration’s regulatory freeze, issued on January 20, 2025, outlines several key directives aimed at pausing and reviewing regulatory actions to ensure they align with the administration’s policy priorities. The memorandum instructs all executive departments and agencies to halt the proposal or issuance of any new rules until they have been reviewed and approved by a department or agency head appointed by President Trump. This directive provides the administration with the opportunity to scrutinize and potentially reshape regulatory frameworks across various sectors. Additionally, the freeze mandates the immediate withdrawal of any rules that have been sent to the Office of the Federal Register but have not yet been published, allowing for a thorough review by the new administration. Another significant aspect of the freeze is the consideration of postponing the effective dates of rules that have been published but not yet taken effect, for 60 days. This delay provides an opportunity to open a comment period for public input on issues of fact, law, and policy raised by such rules. These directives collectively aim to provide the Trump administration with the ability to reassess and potentially modify existing and proposed regulations to better fit its strategic goals.

Impact on Cybersecurity Regulations

The recent regulatory freeze by the Trump administration has potential implications for cybersecurity frameworks, particularly in how they are developed and enforced. The freeze affects several pending and newly proposed rules, including those related to the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) program, which aims to enhance contractor cybersecurity. This program, started under the first Trump administration, continues to be in the spotlight, reflecting the ongoing governmental emphasis on securing contractor networks. The freeze may delay the finalization and implementation of such frameworks, creating uncertainty for organizations striving to comply with contractual cybersecurity standards. Additionally, the Federal Communications Commission’s (FCC) recent item on the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act (CALEA), which proposes new cybersecurity-related obligations, is likely impacted. The freeze could stall the publication and enforcement of these new requirements, affecting how covered providers manage cybersecurity and supply chain risks.

Influence on AI Laws and Policies

By rescinding the AI-focused executive order from the previous administration, which required advanced AI developers to submit safety results to the federal government, the current administration signals a preference for less federal oversight. This change is expected to encourage innovation by reducing compliance burdens on AI developers. This deregulation could lead to inconsistencies in development practices, as companies might prioritize rapid progress over safety and ethical considerations. Additionally, it raises concerns about the potential for inconsistent regulations at the state level, as states like California and Colorado may step in to fill the regulatory void. The appointment of David Sacks as White House AI and Crypto Czar further emphasizes this shift, as his role is likely to focus on promoting innovation while balancing the need for safety and ethical considerations.

Role of CISOs in Adapting to Changes

CISOs should stay informed about the changing regulatory landscape, particularly in areas like cybersecurity and AI, to anticipate potential impacts on compliance requirements. CISOs should also prioritize building flexible security and AI control frameworks that can adapt to new regulations and standards as they emerge. Engaging with industry peers and taking part in policy discussions can provide valuable insights and help shape future regulatory developments. Additionally, fostering strong relationships with legal and compliance teams within the organization ensures a cohesive approach to risk management and regulatory adherence. By embedding compliance in the innovation lifecycle, organizations can mitigate risks and avoid potential setbacks.

Conclusion and Future Considerations

The Trump administration’s regulatory freeze has set the stage for a shift towards lighter federal oversight, which may encourage innovation but also lead to a patchwork of state-level regulations similar to our current national privacy debacle. This could result in varying compliance requirements across different jurisdictions, challenging organizations to maintain consistent security standards. In cybersecurity, the focus is likely to remain on enhancing frameworks like the Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) to secure contractor networks, although delays in implementation may occur. For AI, the emphasis will be on balancing innovation with ethical considerations, as deregulation could lead to rapid technological advancements but also raise concerns about safety and fairness. The recent press about DeepSeek and the Trump administration’s stated approach towards China may further accelerate AI deregulation at the Federal level.

By comparison, the European Union has been proactive in establishing comprehensive regulatory frameworks for AI and cybersecurity, exemplified by the EU AI Act, which adopts a risk-based approach and has broad extraterritorial reach, impacting any entity placing AI systems in the EU market. While the EU continues to tighten its regulatory grip, the U.S. might experience a more relaxed regulatory environment, potentially leading to complexities for global businesses navigating these differing regulatory requirements. Organizations will need to stay informed and adaptable, engaging with policymakers and industry peers to influence future regulations and ensure their strategies align with emerging trends.