Everybody seems to be an expert on artificial intelligence – even California First Partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom, the wife of Gov. Gavin Newsom. No one elected her to anything, but she’s using her official post to convene policy summits on AI.
Her section of the governor’s official state website describes how, on Nov. 19, she hosted a “pivotal Gender Equity Summit … focused on the intersection of gender, technology, and well-being…. this annual Summit underscored the urgent need to design digital spaces that prioritize safety, equity, and humanity.” The summit called for “creating guardrails for AI.”
If it all sounds like an onslaught of pretense and buzzwords, that’s because that’s what it is.
The state website on the first partner’s conference also boasted of “landmark child safety legislation” her husband has signed, and provided a link to a list of 16 bills. In September, we objected to two of the bills as examples of “state paternalism.”
When it comes to AI regulation, it is important that policymakers respect the First Amendment right to freedom of speech and ensure American-developed artificial intelligence capabilities are competitive with what’s being developed abroad.
The problems are similar to the development of such previous technologies as printing, radio and TV, Robby Soave told us. Soave is a senior editor at Reason magazine and the author of “Tech Panic: Why We Shouldn’t Fear Facebook and the Future.”
Soave emphasized how AI is a great learning tool for students as “a gateway to more information. There’s a danger in taking that away from young people.”
Much of the concern is over AI chatbots, which simulate casual conversation. A terrible tragedy struck in Rancho Santa Margarita last April when Adam Raine, 16, hanged himself, allegedly after using ChatGPT. His death was invoked as a justification for state regulation of chatbots by way of Senate Bill 243, which was signed into law in October.
“That’s terrible, but we don’t know all the circumstances,” Soave said, because there is a lot of missing information on what guardrails were in place. And no guardrails can be perfect. As dismayed parents have found out over the ages, teenagers often can find ways around even the tightest restrictions.
California’s laws also can conflict with federal policies. Reporting on the first partner’s conference, Los Angeles Times columnist Anita Chabria noted President Donald Trump has taken a much lighter approach than Newsom to AI regulation. The president has close ties to Silicon Valley tech moguls, who helped fund his new White House ballroom. “Trump is threatening to stop states from overseeing the technology,” she wrote.
Indeed, the president has recently declared he will take executive action to curtail the abilities of states to impose AI regulations.
Soave said he “broadly favors” the federal government letting the states experiment, even if that means California regulates more than Texas. But he cautioned that could mean more tech companies leaving the Golden State.
Indeed, after moving X/Twitter from San Francisco to Texas, in Sept. 2024 Elon Musk posted, “Hard to be a free speech platform in a state that wants to ban free speech.” That came amid a California law regulating the use of deepfakes in electoral politics. A judge blocked the law, arguing it “unconstitutionally stifles the free and unfettered exchange of ideas.”
With Mr. and Mrs. Newsom soon leaving office, we encourage those running for governor in 2026 to back lighter AI regulation. California can’t lead the AI world through repression.