White House’s OMB Releases Guidance on Unbiased AI Principles in Federal Government
On December 11, 2025, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) issued Memorandum M-26-04, Increasing Public Trust in Artificial Intelligence Through Unbiased AI Principles, formalizing agency-wide guidance to implement President Trump’s July 2025 Executive Order on Preventing Woke AI in the Federal Government. The memo operationalizes the Administration’s directive that AI systems procured by federal agencies must be free from ideological bias and social agenda-driven outputs. The White House has moved from rhetoric to implementation on its campaign against so-called “woke” artificial intelligence.
Unbiased AI Principles
At the core of the guidance are two “Unbiased AI Principles” that agencies are now required to enforce through procurement and contracting.
Truth-seeking, which mandates that large language models prioritize factual accuracy, scientific inquiry, and objectivity, while clearly acknowledging uncertainty where information is incomplete or contested.
Ideological neutrality, which requires AI systems to function as nonpartisan tools and prohibits developers from embedding partisan or ideological judgments into model outputs unless explicitly prompted by users .
HOW OMB IS ENFORCING AI “NEUTRALITY”
Critically, OMB’s guidance transforms these principles into binding acquisition requirements. Federal agencies must now update solicitations, contracts, and procurement policies to ensure AI vendors demonstrate compliance with the Unbiased AI Principles. This includes new disclosure obligations around model documentation, acceptable use policies, bias evaluations, red-teaming practices, and mechanisms for user feedback. Agencies are also instructed to modify existing AI contracts where practicable and to establish internal reporting processes for AI outputs that violate neutrality or truth-seeking standards by March 2026.
“While framed as a trust-building exercise, the guidance signals a clear policy shift: AI governance in the federal government will be enforced through procurement leverage, not voluntary principles”
The scope of the guidance is broad. It applies across executive departments, independent agencies, and government-owned corporations, and extends to AI embedded within third-party platforms and software services. While national security systems are formally exempt, OMB encourages agencies to apply the principles where feasible.
While framed as a trust-building exercise, the guidance signals a clear policy shift: AI governance in the federal government will be enforced through procurement leverage, not voluntary principles. At the same time, OMB included a sunset provision, with the guidance set to expire in two years unless extended, underscoring the temporary nature of executive-driven AI rules.
LEGISOLOGIQ OUTLOOK
This guidance underscores the increasing assertiveness of the Trump Administration in reshaping federal AI governance through executive authority. By pairing procurement-based enforcement of “Unbiased AI Principles” with the Administration’s broader push to limit state-level AI regulation through a separate state preemption executive order, the White House is signaling a clear intent to centralize AI policy at the federal level. The strategy is twofold: constrain how AI is built and deployed inside the federal government, while simultaneously curbing the ability of states to impose divergent or more expansive AI rules.
Taken together, these actions reflect a deliberate effort to redefine “responsible AI” on federal terms; prioritizing neutrality, objectivity, and innovation over the risk-based and civil-rights-oriented frameworks emerging in states like California and Colorado. For industry, this creates both short-term clarity and long-term uncertainty. While federal procurement standards may become more predictable, executive-driven preemption remains legally and politically fragile, particularly in the absence of a comprehensive congressional statute.
As we have noted in prior updates, executive orders are inherently temporary. A future administration could reverse both the “unbiased AI” procurement rules and state preemption posture with the stroke of a pen.
Until Congress enacts durable AI legislation, companies will continue to operate in a volatile environment shaped by shifting executive priorities, contested federal-state authority, and an unresolved debate over who ultimately sets the rules of the road for AI governance.
