They didn't so much enact witchcraft laws as inherit them from the laws of England, which were still in force in the colonies. Still are, to the extent that decided cases here are persuasive-but-not-binding precedent before US courts.

The difference between the witchhunts of the 17th century in New England (which are well documented) and the vampire panic of the 19th century (which turns out not to have been about vampires at all apart from two particular cases, it being a whole pile of superstitions about tuberculosis) is that witchcraft has living defendants at trial, so you can actually have a trial. If you can't have a trial - because the defendant is, legally, a corpse, then there's no point to having laws on the matter. Other than the ones about legally exhuming graves to check that the corpse in it isn't suspiciously not decaying etc.

The other big difference is that between the two falls the Witchcraft Act 1735, which was as valid in colonial America as it was in its native England. Contrary to what the name suggests, that Act does not make witchcraft illegal, the first thing it does is make witch-trials illegal. Basically, be it ever so malign, genuine magic was made completely legal in 1735. The Act then went on to prescribe penalties for 'pretences' of summoning spirits, foretelling the future and so forth. It was, theoretically, a complete defence under the Act that you were a genuine witch (and this did get tried: a medium by the name of Helen Duncan got prosecuted under the act during WW2, because she was preying on the distress of bereaved relatives of servicemen, and tried to crack on she was really calling their ghosts forth. She got, if memory serves, six months. The Witchcraft Act got replaced by various consumer protection laws in the end.)