Invasive plants are non-native species that have self-sustaining populations, are spreading into natural areas, and have negative impacts on native ecosystems. An invasive plant that invades one state could quickly spread to surrounding states, so communication and collaboration between multiple states are needed to reduce risk from plant invasions in the U.S. Variations in weed risk assessments (WRAs) used for different states, however, may hinder consistency if WRAs produce different outcomes about which species are invasive. Additionally, it is more effective to prevent a species from becoming widespread than to manage an already-widespread species, so evaluating and regulating invasive species proactively (before they become widespread) would reduce later control costs. Evaluating new, range-shifting invasive species could lead to proactive regulation in light of climate change, but climate change is rarely considered explicitly in existing WRAs. Here, I assessed the consistency of state WRAs to one another as well as whether WRAs can account for range-shifting species proactively. I compared each state’s WRA to the standards laid out by Roy et al. (2018). My analysis determined whether WRAs for 30 states assess similar risk criteria and whether they have the flexibility to potentially incorporate climate change. Species’ spread, impacts, and potential distribution were included in all WRAs whereas species’ native range, introduction pathways, and potential effects in light of climate change were included in less than ten WRAs. Ten out of the 27 states that did not explicitly consider climate change in their WRAs could provide guidance that enables its consideration.