Gavin Newsom Challenges Trump’s AI Executive Order Amid Backlash

California Governor Gavin Newsom has sharply criticized Donald Trump’s recent executive order on artificial intelligence (AI) regulation, which aims to prevent states from enacting their own laws on the technology. The order was signed on October 5, 2023, and Newsom responded within hours, condemning it as a move that promotes “grift and corruption” rather than genuine innovation.

Newsom’s remarks targeted both Trump and David Sacks, a prominent advisor on AI to the former president, suggesting that their approach is less about policy and more about self-interest. “President Trump and David Sacks aren’t making policy – they’re running a con,” he stated, emphasizing the potential negative implications for state governance and public safety.

The executive order is viewed as a significant win for major tech corporations that have lobbied against state-level restrictions. This development has sparked a confrontation between state officials and the federal government over the future of AI governance in the United States.

Legal Challenges and Backlash

Critics, including various child safety organizations, labor unions, and state officials, have raised serious concerns about the legality of Trump’s executive order. Many argue that it undermines the authority of state legislatures to regulate AI technologies, asserting that Trump lacks the power to negate existing state laws. Rob Bonta, the California Attorney General, announced intentions to explore potential legal challenges against the order, setting the stage for a significant legal battle.

The backlash has been swift and widespread. Sara Jacobs, a California Democratic representative, characterized the executive order as “deeply misguided” and stated intentions to pursue all available avenues, including legal action and congressional engagement, to reverse the decision.

California, as a hub for leading AI companies, has been particularly vocal in its opposition. In September 2023, Newsom signed the Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act, which mandates developers of advanced AI models to produce transparency reports and report safety incidents promptly. This legislation has been positioned as a model for national standards in AI regulation.

Responses from Across the Nation

Trump’s executive order also establishes an AI litigation taskforce, tasked with reviewing state laws that do not align with the goal of enhancing the United States’ global dominance in AI. This taskforce is expected to take legal action against such state laws and may threaten to withhold federal broadband funding to states that do not comply.

Critics of the order, including Liz Shuler, president of the AFL-CIO, have condemned it as an attempt to grant unchecked power to tech companies while jeopardizing worker protections and safety standards. Shuler described the executive order as a “brazen effort to upend AI safety.”

Opposition has not been limited to California. Lawmakers from various states have expressed similar concerns. Alex Padilla, a California senator, stated that the order represents an attack on state rights. Fellow senator Adam Schiff warned that the order threatens critical safeguards currently in place.

Even within Trump’s own political circle, there was dissent. Steve Bannon, a longtime Trump ally, criticized the order, suggesting that it misleads the president regarding the implications of state preemption.

The order has also prompted strong reactions from child advocacy groups, particularly in light of rising concerns about the impact of AI technologies on children. James Steyer, CEO of Common Sense Media, highlighted the dangers posed by AI engagement and criticized the administration’s prioritization of tech industry interests over child safety.

As the debate continues, coalitions of bereaved parents and advocacy organizations are mobilizing to push for legislative measures that protect children from harmful AI interactions. They have released public service announcements urging for stronger protections and opposing the federal preemption of state laws.

In summary, the clash over AI regulation between state authorities and the federal government is intensifying, with California at the forefront of the resistance against a federal approach perceived as advantageous to tech giants. This ongoing confrontation may shape the future landscape of AI governance in the United States.