American Innovators Network (AIN)

The American Innovators Network (AIN) is a U.S. industry lobbying coalition of smaller AI companies and venture capital firms that opposes AI regulations it characterizes as favoring incumbent frontier labs. As of April 2026 it reported 30+ partner companies, including a16z, Y Combinator, Slingshot AI, and Skydio, and uses a "Little Tech" framing against rules that, in its words, "let the biggest players in the room write rules that lock Little Tech out" (Source: washingtonpost.com).

Overview

AIN represents smaller AI companies and venture capital firms against what it describes as regulatory capture by large frontier AI labs. The coalition argues that safety-focused regulations, particularly state laws such as the Colorado AI Act, disproportionately burden smaller companies while entrenching incumbents (Source: washingtonpost.com).

As of April 2026, AIN said its membership had grown to 30+ partner companies and that it had hired Jeremy Kudon as executive director. Kudon previously led the Sports Betting Alliance in its campaign to legalize online sports betting nationwide, and according to reporting was expected to bring similar "bare-knuckle tactics" to AI lobbying (Source: washingtonpost.com).

Activities

AIN operates primarily through state lobbying, described as one of three strategies the AI industry is using against state AI regulations, alongside federal preemption and court challenges. Its "Little Tech" framing is set against the frontier labs' position that safety regulation is necessary for national security (Source: washingtonpost.com).

Reporting has noted several tensions in the coalition's positioning. The "Little Tech" framing covers backers, including a16z and Y Combinator, that fund some of the largest and most well-capitalized AI companies. The coalition's opposition to algorithmic discrimination laws, such as Colorado's, aligns with frontier labs such as xAI while AIN nominally represents smaller players. Its tactics have been compared to earlier tech lobbying efforts (Uber/Lyft, DraftKings/FanDuel) in which industry coalitions defeated consumer protection legislation state by state (Source: washingtonpost.com).

Kudon has described governors as a "backstop" able to block state AI laws in the absence of federal preemption, and has cited as AIN's record then-Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin's veto of a high-risk AI bill (see Virginia HB 2094 (High-Risk AI Developer and Deployer Act, vetoed)), California Governor Gavin Newsom's rejection of an AI chatbot bill in autumn 2025, Colorado Governor Jared Polis's move to replace his state's law (see Colorado AI Act), and New York Governor Kathy Hochul's amendments to that state's AI safety law (see New York RAISE Act) (Source: politico.com).

Shift from blocking to harmonization (2026)

By September 2026, Kudon described a change in the coalition's approach to state legislatures. Asked about the shift, he attributed it to public opinion: "As the polling got more negative or more people were supportive of some sort of regulation, I think that legislators, especially in an election year, they're drawn to that kind of like bugs drawn to light." While maintaining that AI rules "really should be a federal thing," he acknowledged that the argument had become untenable. Politico reported that AIN's lobbyists had largely abandoned efforts to persuade legislators to hold off on AI bills and were instead urging them to streamline AI laws across states — a position Politico distinguishes from, while grouping alongside, OpenAI's separately reported "reverse federalism" strategy of harmonizing state safety rules around a single standard (Source: politico.com).

Kudon also described the coalition as outmatched by pro-regulation advocacy, saying "We are the Davids now, against the Goliaths," and attributed the growth of that advocacy in large part to funding from Anthropic, which he said was working to capture regulators and shield itself from competition. Anthropic's head of U.S. state and local government relations, Cesar Fernandez, responded that the company has backed new safety rules only for companies using significant computing power and earning more than $500 million a year: "They don't affect startups, so it is unfortunate to see them invoked to fight third-party audits, independent evaluations, and other commonsense AI safety regulations that the majority of Americans support" (Source: politico.com).

AIN lobbyists attended a gathering of state legislators in Chicago in late July 2026, working to align legislators' plans with existing state laws and warning that aggressive rules would harm AI startups; Politico reported that, unlike at the previous year's gathering, they were met at nearly every turn by advocates for strict regulation (Source: politico.com).

Relationships

• related: Techno-Federalism — AIN's state-by-state lobbying is one of the three industry strategies that framework describes; the 2026 shift from blocking to harmonization is a change within it
• related: AI Industry Lobbying — The 2025-2026 Political Offensive — AIN as one strand of the broader lobbying picture
• related: Andreessen Horowitz (a16z) — named backer
• contradicts: Colorado AI Act (SB 24-205) — the algorithmic-discrimination model AIN opposes as disproportionately burdening smaller companies
• contradicts: Anthropic — Kudon attributes pro-regulation advocacy funding to Anthropic and characterizes its position as regulatory capture; Anthropic disputes the characterization on the record
• supports: Executive Order 14365 — federal preemption of state AI rules, the outcome AIN's federal-first position seeks
• related: Leading the Future (super PAC) — a separately funded super PAC pursuing overlapping aims through electoral rather than lobbying means
• related: Public First Action (super PAC) — opposing coalition on state AI regulation

Sources

• AI & Tech Brief: Radical Activists and AI Safety (Source: washingtonpost.com) (2026-04-13)
• 'The landscape has changed dramatically': States defy the tech lobby on AI rules (Source: politico.com) (2026-09-02)