California Governor Gavin Newsom Pushes Back on President Trump's AI Executive Order Seeking to Preempting State Laws.

The ink was barely dry on Donald Trump's sweeping AI policy directive when Gavin Newsom issued a forceful rebuttal. Just hours after the decree was released on Thursday evening, Newsom released comments arguing that the White House order, which seeks to prevent states from crafting their own AI rules, advances “corruption and self-dealing” instead of true technological progress.

“President Trump and David Sacks aren’t making policy – 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 Major Victory for Silicon Valley Creates a Legal Showdown

The presidential directive is seen as a decisive win for tech firms that have actively campaigned against legislative barriers to developing and deploying their artificial intelligence systems. It also establishes a potential conflict between state governments and the federal administration over the future of AI regulation. The immediate backlash from organizations such as child safety advocates, unions, and elected leaders has underscored the highly controversial nature of the order.

Several officials and groups have raised doubts about the constitutionality of the executive order, stating that Trump does not have the authority to override local laws on AI and denouncing the order as the result of intense tech industry lobbying. California, the base for many leading tech firms and one of the most active states on AI policy, has emerged as a central locus for pushback against the order.

“This directive is deeply misguided, grossly unethical, and will ultimately stifle innovation and erode confidence in the long run,” said a lawmaker from California, Sara Jacobs. “We will explore all avenues – including legal and legislative action – to overturn this policy.”

Legislative Loggerheads and Potential Legal Duel

In September, Newsom signed a pioneering artificial intelligence act that would require developers of advanced "frontier" AI systems to provide transparency reports and immediately notify authorities of safety incidents or risk penalties exceeding $1 million. The governor championed this legislation as a model for governing the tech sector across the country.

“California's position as a worldwide innovator in tech provides a distinct chance to establish a framework for sensible regulations beyond our borders,” Newsom 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 targeted by the administration. Thursday’s executive order calls for an legal review panel that would review local regulations deemed not to “bolster the United States’ global AI dominance” and then initiate lawsuits or threaten to cut federal broadband funding. Opponents argue that the administration has never provided any cohesive national plan to supersede 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 give tech billionaires absolute authority over working people’s jobs, rights and livelihoods,” said a major labor leader, Liz Shuler.

Broad Opposition Intensifies Across the Spectrum

Shortly after the order was signed, criticism grew among elected officials, labor leaders, child welfare organizations and civil liberties organizations that decried the move. State officials argued the executive order was an attack against local autonomy.

“No place in America 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 fundamental protections in one fell swoop.”

Similarly, Adam Schiff emphasized: “The President is seeking to preempt state laws that are establishing meaningful safeguards around AI and substituting them with … nothing.”

Officials from multiple states also expressed concern over the order. A Virginia representative labeled it a “terrible idea” that would “create a lawless Wild West environment for AI companies”. A New York assemblymember described the directive a “huge giveaway” for AI firms, adding that “a few powerful executives bribed Donald Trump into selling out America’s future”.

Remarkably, even a former Trump adviser criticized the policy, saying in a message that the President's adviser had “completely misled the President on this issue”. The head of an investment firm similarly said that “the solution is not preempting state and local laws”.

Protecting Children Take Center Stage

Resistance against the order has also included child protection organizations that have repeatedly warned over the impacts of AI on children. The debate has intensified this year following multiple lawsuits against AI companies concerning harm to children.

“The AI industry’s relentless race for user attention already has a body count, and, in enacting this policy, the White House has made clear it is willing to allow it to continue,” said James Steyer. “Americans deserve better than corporate favors at the cost of their wellbeing.”

A group of grieving families and safety groups have also spoken out the order. They have been working to pass legislation to safeguard children from risky online platforms and AI chatbots and released a PSA opposing the AI preemption policy.

“Families will not stand idly by and allow our kids to remain test subjects in big tech’s deadly AI experiment that puts profits over the safety of our kids,” declared Sarah Gardner. “We need strong protections at the national and local level, not immunity for wealthy executives.”