🔗 Share this article California Governor Gavin Newsom Responds on President Trump's Artificial Intelligence Decree Seeking to Blocking Local Regulations. Scarcely had the ink dried on the President's sweeping AI policy directive when Gavin Newsom issued a forceful rebuttal. Shortly following the order went public on Thursday night, the governor released comments stating that the White House order, which seeks to block local governments from regulating AI, promotes “corruption and self-dealing” rather than genuine innovation. “The administration and its adviser aren’t making policy – they’re running a con,” the governor stated, referencing Trump’s AI adviser. “Every day, they push the limits to see what they can get away with.” A Major Victory for Silicon Valley Creates a Legal Showdown The presidential directive is seen as a major victory for technology companies that have lobbied vigorously to remove regulatory hurdles to creating and launching their AI products. It also establishes a looming clash between state governments and the federal administration over the direction of artificial intelligence governance. The immediate backlash from groups including children's welfare groups, unions, and elected leaders has underscored the highly controversial nature of the order. A number of leaders and organizations have already questioned the constitutionality of the executive order, stating that the President lacks the power to override local laws on AI and denouncing the order as the product of powerful corporate influence. California, the base for many leading tech firms and one of the most active states on AI policy, has become a primary hub for pushback against the order. “This executive order is profoundly flawed, grossly unethical, and will ultimately stifle progress and weaken public trust in the long run,” remarked a lawmaker from California, Sara Jacobs. “We are examining every option – including legal and legislative action – to reverse this decision.” A Policy Standoff and Imminent Court Battle In September, Governor Newsom signed a pioneering artificial intelligence act that would require developers of advanced "frontier" AI systems to disclose safety data and immediately notify authorities of critical failures or face fines exceeding $1 million. The governor championed this legislation as a model for governing the tech sector nationwide. “California's position as a worldwide innovator in tech provides a distinct chance to establish a framework for sensible regulations for the entire nation,” the governor stated in an speech. “Especially in the absence of a comprehensive federal AI policy.” The recent state law and additional pending regulations could now be in Trump’s crosshairs. Thursday’s executive order calls for an legal review panel that would scrutinize state laws deemed not to “enhance the United States’ global AI dominance” and then pursue legal action or potentially withhold government grants. Critics argue that the White House has never provided any comprehensive federal framework to supersede the local rules it seeks to preempt. “President Trump’s unlawful executive order is simply a blatant attempt to dismantle safeguards and grant powerful executives absolute authority over employment, rights and livelihoods,” said a major labor leader, Liz Shuler. Broad Opposition Intensifies From Multiple Quarters Shortly after the order was signed, opposition loudened among elected officials, union heads, child welfare organizations and rights groups that decried the policy. Other California Democratic leaders said the executive order was an assault on local autonomy. “No state knows the promise of AI better than California,” noted a U.S. Senator. “However, this new policy, the White House is attacking state leadership and basic safeguards in a single stroke.” In a similar vein, Adam Schiff stressed: “Trump is attempting to override local regulations that are creating vital protections around AI and replace them with … a void.” Officials from multiple states also took issue with the order. A Virginia representative labeled it a “disastrous policy” that would “create a lawless Wild West environment for AI companies”. Another state legislator described the directive a “huge giveaway” for AI firms, adding that “a few powerful executives influenced the President into compromising America’s future”. Even a former Trump adviser found fault with the policy, reportedly stating that the President's adviser had “completely misled the President on preemption”. A philanthropic tech investor echoed that “the solution is not preempting state and local laws”. Protecting Children Take Center Stage Resistance against the order has extended to groups focused on kids' safety that have repeatedly warned over the impacts of AI on minors. This discussion has intensified this year following multiple lawsuits against AI companies related to harm to children. “The AI industry’s relentless race for engagement already has a body count, and, in enacting this policy, the White House has signaled it is willing to allow it to continue,” argued James Steyer. “The public deserves more than corporate favors at the cost of their safety.” A group of grieving families and safety groups have publicly opposed the order. They have been working to pass legislation to safeguard children from harmful social media and AI chatbots and issued a PSA opposing the AI preemption policy. “Parents will not stand idly by and allow our kids to remain lab rats in big tech’s deadly AI experiment that prioritizes revenue over the safety of our kids,” said Sarah Gardner. “It is essential to have strong protections at the national and local level, not immunity for wealthy executives.”
Scarcely had the ink dried on the President's sweeping AI policy directive when Gavin Newsom issued a forceful rebuttal. Shortly following the order went public on Thursday night, the governor released comments stating that the White House order, which seeks to block local governments from regulating AI, promotes “corruption and self-dealing” rather than genuine innovation. “The administration and its adviser aren’t making policy – they’re running a con,” the governor stated, referencing Trump’s AI adviser. “Every day, they push the limits to see what they can get away with.” A Major Victory for Silicon Valley Creates a Legal Showdown The presidential directive is seen as a major victory for technology companies that have lobbied vigorously to remove regulatory hurdles to creating and launching their AI products. It also establishes a looming clash between state governments and the federal administration over the direction of artificial intelligence governance. The immediate backlash from groups including children's welfare groups, unions, and elected leaders has underscored the highly controversial nature of the order. A number of leaders and organizations have already questioned the constitutionality of the executive order, stating that the President lacks the power to override local laws on AI and denouncing the order as the product of powerful corporate influence. California, the base for many leading tech firms and one of the most active states on AI policy, has become a primary hub for pushback against the order. “This executive order is profoundly flawed, grossly unethical, and will ultimately stifle progress and weaken public trust in the long run,” remarked a lawmaker from California, Sara Jacobs. “We are examining every option – including legal and legislative action – to reverse this decision.” A Policy Standoff and Imminent Court Battle In September, Governor Newsom signed a pioneering artificial intelligence act that would require developers of advanced "frontier" AI systems to disclose safety data and immediately notify authorities of critical failures or face fines exceeding $1 million. The governor championed this legislation as a model for governing the tech sector nationwide. “California's position as a worldwide innovator in tech provides a distinct chance to establish a framework for sensible regulations for the entire nation,” the governor stated in an speech. “Especially in the absence of a comprehensive federal AI policy.” The recent state law and additional pending regulations could now be in Trump’s crosshairs. Thursday’s executive order calls for an legal review panel that would scrutinize state laws deemed not to “enhance the United States’ global AI dominance” and then pursue legal action or potentially withhold government grants. Critics argue that the White House has never provided any comprehensive federal framework to supersede the local rules it seeks to preempt. “President Trump’s unlawful executive order is simply a blatant attempt to dismantle safeguards and grant powerful executives absolute authority over employment, rights and livelihoods,” said a major labor leader, Liz Shuler. Broad Opposition Intensifies From Multiple Quarters Shortly after the order was signed, opposition loudened among elected officials, union heads, child welfare organizations and rights groups that decried the policy. Other California Democratic leaders said the executive order was an assault on local autonomy. “No state knows the promise of AI better than California,” noted a U.S. Senator. “However, this new policy, the White House is attacking state leadership and basic safeguards in a single stroke.” In a similar vein, Adam Schiff stressed: “Trump is attempting to override local regulations that are creating vital protections around AI and replace them with … a void.” Officials from multiple states also took issue with the order. A Virginia representative labeled it a “disastrous policy” that would “create a lawless Wild West environment for AI companies”. Another state legislator described the directive a “huge giveaway” for AI firms, adding that “a few powerful executives influenced the President into compromising America’s future”. Even a former Trump adviser found fault with the policy, reportedly stating that the President's adviser had “completely misled the President on preemption”. A philanthropic tech investor echoed that “the solution is not preempting state and local laws”. Protecting Children Take Center Stage Resistance against the order has extended to groups focused on kids' safety that have repeatedly warned over the impacts of AI on minors. This discussion has intensified this year following multiple lawsuits against AI companies related to harm to children. “The AI industry’s relentless race for engagement already has a body count, and, in enacting this policy, the White House has signaled it is willing to allow it to continue,” argued James Steyer. “The public deserves more than corporate favors at the cost of their safety.” A group of grieving families and safety groups have publicly opposed the order. They have been working to pass legislation to safeguard children from harmful social media and AI chatbots and issued a PSA opposing the AI preemption policy. “Parents will not stand idly by and allow our kids to remain lab rats in big tech’s deadly AI experiment that prioritizes revenue over the safety of our kids,” said Sarah Gardner. “It is essential to have strong protections at the national and local level, not immunity for wealthy executives.”