The signature was still fresh on Donald Trump's sweeping AI policy directive when the California governor issued a forceful rebuttal. Just hours after the order went public on Thursday evening, the governor issued a statement arguing that the White House order, which seeks to prevent states from crafting their own AI rules, promotes “grift and corruption” rather than true technological progress.
“The administration and its adviser aren’t making policy – they’re running a con,” Newsom declared, mentioning Trump’s AI adviser. “Day after day, they test boundaries to see how far they can take it.”
The presidential directive is seen as a major victory for tech firms that have actively campaigned to remove regulatory hurdles to creating and launching their AI products. Furthermore, it sets up a looming clash between local authorities and the White House over the direction of artificial intelligence governance. The immediate backlash from groups including child safety advocates, unions, and elected leaders has highlighted the highly controversial nature of the order.
A number of leaders and groups have raised doubts about the legality of the executive order, stating that Trump does not have the authority to override local laws on AI and denouncing the decree as the result of intense tech industry lobbying. California, home to many prominent AI companies and one of the most prolific legislators on AI policy, has become a primary hub for resistance against the order.
“This executive order is profoundly flawed, wildly corrupt, and will ultimately stifle progress and erode confidence in the long run,” said a lawmaker from California, Sara Jacobs. “We are examining all avenues – including legal and legislative action – to overturn this policy.”
In September, Governor Newsom enacted a landmark AI law that would require developers of large, powerful AI models to provide transparency reports and immediately notify authorities of critical failures or face fines exceeding $1 million. Newsom touted this Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence act as a model for governing the tech sector nationwide.
“California's position as a worldwide innovator in tech allows us a distinct chance to provide a blueprint for sensible regulations for the entire nation,” Newsom stated in an address. “This is particularly vital given the lack of a national regulatory framework.”
This September bill and additional pending regulations could now be in Trump’s crosshairs. Thursday’s executive order establishes an legal review panel that would review state laws deemed not to “enhance the United States’ competitive edge” and then initiate lawsuits or potentially withhold government grants. Critics contend that the administration has never provided any comprehensive federal framework to replace the local rules it seeks to preempt.
“This unconstitutional directive is nothing more than a blatant attempt to dismantle safeguards and give tech billionaires unchecked power over working people’s jobs, rights and freedoms,” stated AFL-CIO president, Liz Shuler.
Shortly after the directive was enacted, opposition loudened among lawmakers, labor leaders, children’s advocacy groups and rights groups that decried the move. State officials argued the executive order was an attack against local autonomy.
“No state knows the promise of artificial intelligence technologies better than California,” noted Alex Padilla. “But with today’s executive order, the administration is undermining local initiative and fundamental protections in a single stroke.”
Similarly, Adam Schiff emphasized: “The President is seeking to preempt state laws that are creating vital protections around AI and replace them with … nothing.”
Lawmakers from multiple states also expressed concern over the order. One congressmember called it a “terrible idea” that would “create a lawless Wild West environment for AI companies”. Another state legislator called the order a “massive windfall” for AI firms, stating that “a handful of AI oligarchs influenced the President into compromising America’s future”.
Even Steve Bannon criticized the policy, saying in a message that the AI czar had “given poor counsel to the President on this issue”. The head of an investment firm echoed that “the solution is not preempting state and local laws”.
Resistance against the order has extended to groups focused on kids' safety that have long expressed concerns over the effects of AI on minors. The debate has intensified this year following legal actions against AI companies concerning tragic incidents.
“The AI industry’s relentless race for engagement has already led to loss of life, and, in issuing this order, the administration has signaled it is content to let it grow,” argued the head of a child advocacy group. “The public deserves more than tech industry handouts at the expense of their safety.”
A group of grieving families and child advocacy organizations have also spoken out the order. They have been advocating for new laws to safeguard children from harmful social media and AI chatbots and issued a PSA condemning the federal override.
“Parents will not stand idly by and allow our kids to remain lab rats in big tech’s deadly AI experiment that puts profits over the wellbeing of children,” said Sarah Gardner. “We need robust safeguards at the federal and state level, not amnesty for big tech billionaires.”
An educator and robotics enthusiast passionate about integrating AI into learning environments to inspire students.
