Below is a recap of the essential regulatory updates for contact compliance professionals for December.   

This is a marketing blog and is not intended, nor should it be interpreted, as legal advice. Please seek legal counsel for full interpretations of all rules and laws outlined in this blog. 

A Federal A.I. Clampdown on State A.I. Laws: What It Means for Outbound Marketing and Call Centers 

Early 2025 Started With A Sweeping Federal Idea 

Early in 2025, federal AI policy debates quickly moved beyond narrow, sector-specific proposals to a much bigger question: should Washington effectively sideline states on AI for a decade? Reporting and analysis around the administration’s AI agenda describe how early federal proposals included a 10-year moratorium on most state AI regulation, framed as a way to avoid a “patchwork” of 50 different AI rulebooks and to give federal policymakers space to build a single national framework.  

State officials saw that very differently. A bipartisan coalition of 36 state attorneys general sent a November 25 letter to Congress urging it to reject any federal moratorium that would prohibit states from enacting or enforcing AI laws. The AGs stressed that AI is already being used to perpetrate scams, distort reality, and harm vulnerable consumers, and that broad preemption would undermine states’ ability to respond quickly and effectively to emerging AI risks. That pushback was a key reason the 10-year freeze idea never made it into final legislation.  

November: Moratorium Language Fails, But The Preemption Fight Continues 

By late November, commentary from academics and practitioners noted that Congress had specifically, and overwhelmingly, rejected imposing a moratorium on state regulation of artificial intelligence in the administration’s signature legislative vehicle for the year. At the same time, the Department of Justice and other parts of the administration were already pivoting toward a different tool: aggressive use of existing federal powers, including dormant commerce clause arguments, to challenge state AI laws one by one.  

State AGs doubled down, warning in public letters and press releases that a federal ban on state AI laws would be sweeping and wholly destructive and would jeopardize state experiments in areas like AI safety, automated decision-making safeguards, and consumer opt-outs from high-risk profiling. For companies in outbound telemarketing, largescale texting, and AI driven call centers, this period made clear that the compliance landscape would be defined by an ongoing tug-of-war between federal centralization efforts and state level consumer protection agendas.  

December 11 EO: “Eliminating State Law Obstruction of National AI Policy” 

On December 11, President Trump signed the executive order (EO) “Eliminating State Law Obstruction of National Artificial Intelligence Policy,” also referenced as “Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence.” The order’s stated goal is to create a “minimally burdensome national standard – not 50 discordant State ones” and to “sustain and enhance the United States’ global AI dominance” through a unified federal framework.  

Key features include: 

• DOJ AI Litigation Task Force: The Attorney General must create a task force dedicated to challenging onerous state AI laws such as violating the dormant commerce clause, being preempted by federal statutes or regulations, or otherwise unlawful.  
• Commerce Department review of state AI laws: Within 90 days, Commerce must identify state AI measures that conflict with the administration’s lighter touch AI agenda, including laws that require AI models to alter ‘truthful outputs’ or compel disclosures that could implicate the First Amendment, and refer those laws to DOJ.  
• Leverage of federal funding: The order contemplates conditioning broadband and other discretionary funding on states refraining from certain restrictive AI laws, further pressuring states to align with federal preferences.  
• Legislative roadmap: It directs senior White House officials to develop legislative recommendations for a uniform federal AI framework that would formally preempt conflicting state AI laws.  

Commentators have characterized the EO as a ‘onerule’ effort to curb state AI regulation and as a significant victory for tech companies seeking to avoid state by state AI constraints, while also predicting substantial legal challenges from states and consumer advocates.  

State AGs’ Response: Federal Floor, Not Ceiling 

The same coalition of 36 AGs that opposed the moratorium quickly framed the EO as part of a broader attempt to gut state AI laws and shift too much power to Washington.  

Their position is consistent:  

• Federal AI rules should provide baseline protections, but states must retain authority to respond to local harms and rapidly evolving threats like AI driven scams, deepfakes, and manipulative chatbots.  
• Many existing state privacy laws already include opt outs and risk assessment requirements for high-risk automated decision making, and those innovations should not be rolled back. 

For compliance teams, this signals that even if DOJ begins challenging specific state AI laws under the EO, state AGs will continue to pursue AI-related conduct under general unfair-and-deceptive-acts statutes and sectoral laws (e.g. telecommunications, finance, healthcare, and more). 

What This Means For Outbound Telemarketing, Texting, and AI Enabled Call Centers 

The late 2025 developments translate into several practical themes: 

• Federal trend toward one AI rulebook: The EO and related commentary are explicit in that the administration wants a single, minimally burdensome national AI standard, not a patchwork of state requirements. For outbound operations, that could eventually reduce conflicting AI specific state obligations layered on top of existing telemarketing rules.  
• Preemption will be litigated, not assumed: The AI Litigation Task Force and Commerce review process are designed to build preemption cases one statute at a time. Until courts rule, companies should not assume particular state AI provisions are nullified.  
• Existing federal and state consumer protection rules still anchor risk: The EO does not touch the TCPA, state telemarketing laws, or UDAP statutes. AI assisted dialing, routing, scripting, and texting will continue to be judged under those frameworks, with AI simply increasing the scale and sophistication of potential violations. 
• Documentation and explainability matter: As federal agencies and DOJ scrutinize which state laws “conflict” with a lighter touch AI agenda, companies deploying AI in outbound programs should be prepared to explain what their systems do, what data they use, and how they avoid deceptive or harmful outcomes. That will be critical both in agency interactions and in any state AG investigations. 

The bottom line: in 2025, the 10-year moratorium on state AI regulation failed, but its core goal – centralizing AI policy at the federal level – reemerged in the December executive order. Outbound marketers and call centers should expect a contested period where federal agencies move to preempt some state AI laws even as state AGs continue to press AI-driven enforcement theories under existing telemarketing, privacy, and consumer protection statutes. 

January 2026 Holiday Solicitation Bans 

Please be aware of the following U.S. holiday telephone solicitation bans for the month of January 2026: 

• On Thursday, January 1, 2026, the states of Alabama, Louisiana, Nebraska*, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Utah prohibit unsolicited sales and marketing calls in observance of New Year’s Day.  
• On Friday, January 2, 2026, the state of Louisiana prohibits unsolicited sales and marketing calls in observance of New Year’s Day, proclaimed by the Governor.  
• On Monday, January 19, 2026, the states of Alabama, Louisiana, Nebraska*, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Utah prohibit unsolicited sales and marketing calls in observance of Martin Luther King, Jr Day (in Alabama, Monday, January 19th is referred to as Martin Luther King, Jr & Robert E. Lee’s Birthday). 
• Other holidays may be proclaimed by the Governor in each state throughout the year. 

*Nebraska does not prohibit calls on Sundays or legal holidays; however, it does restrict the use of prerecorded messages to 1 pm to 9 pm on these days (subject to certain exceptions). 

Please be aware of the following Canadian holiday telephone solicitation bans for the month of January 2026: 

• On Thursday, January 1, 2026, all Canadian provinces and territories prohibit unsolicited sales and marketing calls in observance of New Year’s Day. 

Gryphon has updated its existing service parameters to reflect these solicitation bans.

Upcoming Reminders 

1. Oregon HB 3865 is effective January 1, 2026 (contact hours 8 am-8 pm, phone or text outreach max 3x in 24 hours)

2. Virginia SB 1339 is effective January 1, 2026 (honor stop/unsubscribe text requests for 10 years; mandates caller-ID & opt outs, modified disclosures) 

3. FCC “Call Branding” NPRM: Advanced Methods to Target and Eliminate Robocalls 

This FCC (Federal Communications Commission) NPRM (FCC 2576) seeks comment on new and strengthened requirements for voice service providers and related entities to detect, block, and mitigate illegal robocalls, including enhancements to STIR/SHAKEN and other call authentication and traceback measures. Also includes Call Abandonment, Foreign Calls, ‘Revoke All’ Consent, AI Prerecorded Voice Caller ID & Fraud Alerts. 

Key dates include: 

• Published in Federal Register: December 5, 2025 
• Comments due to FCC: February 3, 2026 
• FCC reply responses expected (45 days after comment deadline): March 20, 2026 

Newly Adopted 

FCC “VoIP” FNPRM: Updating Rules to Curb Robocallers’ Access to Phone Numbers  

FCC 25-86, a Third Report and Order and Third Further Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, was adopted on December 18, 2025, in the FCC’s December Open Meeting. This FCC order extends robocall, public safety, and national security certification and disclosure requirements to all interconnected VoIP providers with direct access to numbers and seeking further comment on reclaiming numbers and restricting access for high-risk entities. 

Important information: 

• All Providers must comply, not just “new” providers: All interconnected VoIP providers with direct access to U.S. numbers must now certify and disclose their robocall mitigation, public safety, and national security compliance, closing a gap where only new applicants previously had to do so. 
• Existing Providers have 30 days to Comply: Existing direct access authorization holders must file the required certifications within 30 days of the rules’ effective date to keep their numbering authorizations. 
• FCC is Seeking Comment: The FCC is also seeking comment on reclaiming numbers from VoIP providers whose authorizations are revoked/terminated, and restricting numbering authorizations for entities on the FCC Covered List or using high risk equipment. 

New News 

Phase 2 of Operation Robocall Round Up Underway: A High State Attorneys General Priority 

Phase 2 of Operation Robocall Round Up is underway and is a high priority for State Attorneys General. 

Operation Robocall Roundup – Phase 2 announced on December 3, 2025, “is about the larger companies that are knowingly pushing through millions of scam robocalls,” said Attorney General Jeff Jackson.”   

AG Jackson (NC), AG Todd Rokita (IN) and AG Dave Yost (OH) lead the bipartisan Anti-Robocall Multistate Litigation Task Force, a coalition of 51 state attorneys general formed in 2022 to investigate and bring enforcement actions against companies and voice service providers that carry large volumes of illegal and fraudulent robocall traffic into and across the United States. 

In 2025, the task force launched “Operation Robocall Roundup,” a multistate campaign in phases targeting providers that continue to transmit illegal robocalls despite repeated warnings. 

Phase 1 sent warning letters to 37 smaller voice providers; results reported by AGs include removals from the FCC Robocall Mitigation Database, providers disappearing from traceback results, and termination of high-risk accounts.  

Phase 2 shifted focus to larger carriers (e.g., Inteliquent, Bandwidth, Lumen, Peerless) alleged to route millions or billions of scam calls, demanding they immediately stop carrying suspected illegal robocall traffic. 

FTC Releases Annual Do Not Call Registry Data Book 

The FY 2025 National Do Not Call (DNC) Registry Data Book summarizes complaints and registration activity on the Registry, and highlights how the data is used for enforcement and call blocking. 

In 2025, the FTC received over 2.6 million DNC complaints from consumers, and the Registry contained over 258 million active registrations covering telephone numbers nationwide. 

Complaint counts are based on unverified consumer reports, not survey data, and complaints older than five years are purged twice a year.  

See more here. 

Collections Update: Inconvenient Hours, Expanding Risk: FDCPA Lawsuit Targets Text and Email Contacts After Consumer Notice 

A consumer sued January Technologies in the Northern District of Indiana, alleging FDCPA and Regulation F violations tied to “inconvenient time” contacts.  

Twice in October 2025, the consumer mailed letters stating it was inconvenient to be contacted “in any way whatsoever (this includes emails and phone calls) from 8 am to 6 pm,” permitting contact only after 6 pm. 

The complaint claims January nonetheless sent a text at 5:04 p.m. on October 22, 2025, along with multiple emails during the restricted 8 am–6 pm window. 

Plaintiff alleges these communications violate 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(a)(1) and 12 C.F.R. § 1006.6(b)(1) – Reg F — and seeks actual and statutory damages plus attorneys’ fees.  

For collectors, the case illustrates that: 

• Consumer-specified inconvenient times can narrow contact windows beyond the default 8 am–9 pm norms.   
• Stated preferences may be read to apply across channels (calls, texts, emails). 
• Systems must promptly capture and honor time of day restrictions to reduce inconvenient time litigation risk. 

About Gryphon AI  

Staying updated with the latest regulatory changes is crucial for any enterprise aiming to minimize risk and maximize reach. Gryphon AI is the only automatic, real-time, intelligent contact compliance solution on the market that delivers compliant, real-time intelligence into every customer conversation.      

With Gryphon AI, enterprises can stay ahead of the regulatory curve and efficiently manage all regulatory changes, ensuring seamless compliance and operational excellence.      

To learn more about how Gryphon AI can help you manage these updates, reach out to us today.