🔗 Share this article Gavin Newsom Pushes Back on President Trump's AI Executive Order Seeking to Blocking State Laws. The signature was still fresh on Donald Trump's sweeping AI policy directive when the California governor issued a forceful rebuttal. Shortly following the order went public on Thursday evening, Newsom released comments contending that the presidential dictum, which seeks to block local governments from crafting their own AI rules, promotes “grift and corruption” rather than genuine innovation. “President Trump and David Sacks are not crafting legislation – they are executing a scheme,” the governor declared, mentioning Trump’s AI adviser. “Every day, they test boundaries 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 decisive win for tech firms that have lobbied vigorously against legislative barriers to developing and deploying their artificial intelligence systems. 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 organizations such as child safety advocates, unions, and state officials has highlighted the highly controversial nature of the order. A number of leaders and organizations have raised doubts about the legality of the executive order, arguing that Trump does not have the authority to undermine local laws on AI and labeling the order as the result of powerful corporate influence. California, the base for many prominent AI companies and one of the most prolific legislators on AI policy, has emerged as a primary hub for resistance against the order. “This executive order is profoundly flawed, wildly corrupt, and will actually hinder progress and erode confidence in the long run,” said a lawmaker from California, Sara Jacobs. “We are examining all avenues – from the courts to Congress – to reverse this decision.” A Policy Standoff and Potential Legal Duel Earlier this year, Governor Newsom enacted a landmark AI law that would require developers of large, powerful AI models to provide transparency reports and promptly report safety incidents or risk penalties exceeding $1 million. The governor championed this legislation as a blueprint for regulating AI companies across the country. “Our state’s status as a worldwide innovator in technology provides a unique opportunity to provide a blueprint for well-balanced AI policies for the entire nation,” the governor stated in an address. “Especially in the absence of a comprehensive federal AI policy.” The recent state law and other California legislation could now be in Trump’s crosshairs. Thursday’s executive order calls for an AI litigation taskforce that would review state laws deemed not to “bolster the United States’ competitive edge” and then pursue legal action or threaten to cut federal broadband funding. Opponents argue that the administration has never provided any comprehensive federal framework to replace the state laws it seeks to preempt. “This unconstitutional directive is nothing more than a brazen effort to upend AI safety and grant powerful executives unchecked power over employment, rights and freedoms,” stated a major labor leader, Liz Shuler. Nationwide Backlash Intensifies From Multiple Quarters Within hours the order was signed, opposition loudened among lawmakers, labor leaders, children’s advocacy groups and civil liberties organizations that condemned the move. State officials argued the action was an assault on 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 attacking local initiative and basic safeguards in a single stroke.” In a similar vein, Adam Schiff stressed: “The President is attempting to override state laws that are creating vital protections around AI and substituting them with … a void.” Officials from Colorado to Virginia to New York also took issue with the order. One congressmember called it a “disastrous policy” that would “create a unregulated landscape for AI companies”. A New York assemblymember called the order a “massive windfall” for AI firms, adding that “a few powerful executives bribed Donald Trump into compromising America’s future”. Even Steve Bannon criticized the policy, reportedly stating that the AI czar had “completely misled the President on preemption”. The head of an investment firm echoed that “the answer does not lie in overriding local regulations”. Protecting Children Become a Focal Point Resistance against the order has extended to child protection organizations that have long expressed concerns over the effects of AI on children. The debate has grown more urgent following legal actions against AI companies related to tragic incidents. “The tech sector's unchecked pursuit for user attention has already led to loss of life, and, in issuing this order, the administration has signaled it is willing to allow it to continue,” said 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 publicly opposed the order. They have been advocating for new laws to better protect children from risky online platforms and AI chatbots and released a PSA opposing the federal override. “Parents will not roll over and allow our children to remain lab rats in dangerous corporate trials that puts profits over the wellbeing of children,” declared one coalition CEO. “It is essential to have robust safeguards at the national and local level, not immunity for big tech billionaires.”
The signature was still fresh on Donald Trump's sweeping AI policy directive when the California governor issued a forceful rebuttal. Shortly following the order went public on Thursday evening, Newsom released comments contending that the presidential dictum, which seeks to block local governments from crafting their own AI rules, promotes “grift and corruption” rather than genuine innovation. “President Trump and David Sacks are not crafting legislation – they are executing a scheme,” the governor declared, mentioning Trump’s AI adviser. “Every day, they test boundaries 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 decisive win for tech firms that have lobbied vigorously against legislative barriers to developing and deploying their artificial intelligence systems. 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 organizations such as child safety advocates, unions, and state officials has highlighted the highly controversial nature of the order. A number of leaders and organizations have raised doubts about the legality of the executive order, arguing that Trump does not have the authority to undermine local laws on AI and labeling the order as the result of powerful corporate influence. California, the base for many prominent AI companies and one of the most prolific legislators on AI policy, has emerged as a primary hub for resistance against the order. “This executive order is profoundly flawed, wildly corrupt, and will actually hinder progress and erode confidence in the long run,” said a lawmaker from California, Sara Jacobs. “We are examining all avenues – from the courts to Congress – to reverse this decision.” A Policy Standoff and Potential Legal Duel Earlier this year, Governor Newsom enacted a landmark AI law that would require developers of large, powerful AI models to provide transparency reports and promptly report safety incidents or risk penalties exceeding $1 million. The governor championed this legislation as a blueprint for regulating AI companies across the country. “Our state’s status as a worldwide innovator in technology provides a unique opportunity to provide a blueprint for well-balanced AI policies for the entire nation,” the governor stated in an address. “Especially in the absence of a comprehensive federal AI policy.” The recent state law and other California legislation could now be in Trump’s crosshairs. Thursday’s executive order calls for an AI litigation taskforce that would review state laws deemed not to “bolster the United States’ competitive edge” and then pursue legal action or threaten to cut federal broadband funding. Opponents argue that the administration has never provided any comprehensive federal framework to replace the state laws it seeks to preempt. “This unconstitutional directive is nothing more than a brazen effort to upend AI safety and grant powerful executives unchecked power over employment, rights and freedoms,” stated a major labor leader, Liz Shuler. Nationwide Backlash Intensifies From Multiple Quarters Within hours the order was signed, opposition loudened among lawmakers, labor leaders, children’s advocacy groups and civil liberties organizations that condemned the move. State officials argued the action was an assault on 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 attacking local initiative and basic safeguards in a single stroke.” In a similar vein, Adam Schiff stressed: “The President is attempting to override state laws that are creating vital protections around AI and substituting them with … a void.” Officials from Colorado to Virginia to New York also took issue with the order. One congressmember called it a “disastrous policy” that would “create a unregulated landscape for AI companies”. A New York assemblymember called the order a “massive windfall” for AI firms, adding that “a few powerful executives bribed Donald Trump into compromising America’s future”. Even Steve Bannon criticized the policy, reportedly stating that the AI czar had “completely misled the President on preemption”. The head of an investment firm echoed that “the answer does not lie in overriding local regulations”. Protecting Children Become a Focal Point Resistance against the order has extended to child protection organizations that have long expressed concerns over the effects of AI on children. The debate has grown more urgent following legal actions against AI companies related to tragic incidents. “The tech sector's unchecked pursuit for user attention has already led to loss of life, and, in issuing this order, the administration has signaled it is willing to allow it to continue,” said 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 publicly opposed the order. They have been advocating for new laws to better protect children from risky online platforms and AI chatbots and released a PSA opposing the federal override. “Parents will not roll over and allow our children to remain lab rats in dangerous corporate trials that puts profits over the wellbeing of children,” declared one coalition CEO. “It is essential to have robust safeguards at the national and local level, not immunity for big tech billionaires.”