Gavin Newsom Pushes Back on President Trump's Artificial Intelligence Decree Aimed at Blocking Local Regulations.
The signature was still fresh on Donald Trump's sweeping AI policy directive when the California governor came out swinging. Shortly following the decree was released on Thursday night, the governor released comments contending that the White House order, which seeks to prevent states from regulating AI, advances “grift and corruption” rather than true technological progress.
“President Trump and David Sacks are not crafting legislation – they’re running a con,” the governor declared, mentioning Trump’s AI adviser. “Day after day, they push the limits to see how far they can take it.”
A Significant Win for Tech Industry Creates a Federal-State Clash
Trump’s executive order is seen as a decisive win for technology companies that have actively campaigned to remove regulatory hurdles to developing and deploying their artificial intelligence systems. It also sets up a potential conflict between state governments and the federal administration over the direction of artificial intelligence governance. The immediate backlash from organizations such as children's welfare groups, unions, and elected leaders has highlighted the highly controversial nature of the order.
A number of leaders and groups have already questioned the constitutionality of the directive, arguing that the President lacks the power to undermine local laws on AI and denouncing the decree as the product of powerful corporate influence. The state of California, home to many leading tech firms and one of the most active states on AI policy, has become a primary hub for resistance against the order.
“This directive is deeply misguided, grossly unethical, and will actually hinder innovation and weaken public trust in the long run,” remarked a lawmaker from California, Sara Jacobs. “We will explore all avenues – from the courts to Congress – to overturn this policy.”
A Policy Standoff and Potential Legal Duel
Earlier this year, Governor Newsom signed a pioneering artificial intelligence act that would compel developers of large, powerful AI models to disclose safety data and immediately notify authorities of critical failures or risk penalties up to $1 million. The governor championed this legislation as a blueprint for regulating AI companies nationwide.
“California's position as a worldwide innovator in tech provides a unique opportunity to establish a framework for sensible regulations beyond our borders,” the governor said in an address. “Especially in the absence of a comprehensive federal AI policy.”
This September bill and other California legislation could now be in Trump’s crosshairs. Thursday’s executive order establishes an AI litigation taskforce that would review state laws deemed not to “bolster the United States’ competitive edge” and then initiate lawsuits or potentially withhold government grants. Opponents contend that the administration has failed to deliver any cohesive national plan to replace the local rules it seeks to preempt.
“President Trump’s unlawful executive order is nothing more than a blatant attempt to upend AI safety and grant powerful executives absolute authority over working people’s jobs, freedoms and livelihoods,” said a major labor leader, Liz Shuler.
Nationwide Backlash Erupts Across the Spectrum
Shortly after the directive was enacted, opposition loudened among lawmakers, labor leaders, child welfare organizations and rights groups that condemned the policy. State officials said the executive order was an attack against local autonomy.
“No place in America understands the potential of AI better than California,” said a U.S. Senator. “But with today’s executive order, the administration is undermining state leadership and fundamental protections in a single stroke.”
Similarly, Adam Schiff emphasized: “The President is seeking to preempt local regulations that are creating vital protections around AI and replace them with … nothing.”
Officials from Colorado to Virginia to New York also expressed concern over the order. One congressmember called it a “disastrous policy” that would “create a lawless Wild West environment for AI companies”. A New York assemblymember called the order a “huge giveaway” for AI firms, stating that “a few powerful executives influenced Donald Trump into selling out America’s future”.
Remarkably, even Steve Bannon found fault with the policy, saying in a message that the President's adviser had “given poor counsel to the President on preemption”. The head of an investment firm echoed that “the answer does not lie in preempting state and local laws”.
Protecting Children Take Center Stage
Blowback against the order has also included child protection organizations that have long expressed concerns over the impacts of AI on minors. The debate has grown more urgent following multiple lawsuits against AI companies related to tragic incidents.
“The AI industry’s relentless race for engagement has already led to loss of life, and, in issuing this order, the White House has signaled it is willing to allow it to continue,” argued the head of a child advocacy group. “The public deserves more than tech industry handouts at the expense of their wellbeing.”
A group of bereaved parents and child advocacy organizations have publicly opposed the order. They have been working to pass legislation to better protect children from harmful social media and AI chatbots and released a PSA opposing the federal override.
“Parents will not roll over and allow our kids to remain lab rats in big tech’s deadly AI experiment that prioritizes revenue over the wellbeing of children,” said Sarah Gardner. “It is essential to have robust safeguards at the national and local level, not amnesty for wealthy executives.”
