Sen. Adam Schiff Calls for AI Regulation, Critiques Trump’s Voluntary Pacts

Senator Adam Schiff, a California Democrat serving on several key Senate committees overseeing technology and intellectual property, has called for comprehensive regulatory frameworks for artificial intelligence, criticizing the Trump administration’s current approach as insufficient.

The discussion followed the President’s recent invitation of major tech executives to the White House to sign a non-binding agreement pledging to evaluate their own AI safety measures. Schiff described the event as jarring, noting a stark disconnect between the public compliance displayed by industry leaders at the executive’s presence and their private assertions that mandatory regulation is necessary.

“None of these companies want to incur the wrath of this very vengeful president. Apparently, they will say what he wants them to say in his presence,” Schiff observed. He argued that the voluntary nature of the pact fails to address significant national security threats posed by increasingly autonomous and opaque AI models.

Beyond the White House summit, Schiff highlighted broader concerns regarding the military application of AI, including potential investigations into its role in target selection during recent conflicts. He also pointed to administrative pressure exerted on Anthropic, a leading AI firm that refused to allow its technology for domestic mass surveillance or fully autonomous weapons systems.

As the ranking member of the Senate subcommittee on Intellectual Property, Schiff emphasized the critical importance of determining what copyrighted material was utilized to train current AI models. He stated that while some industry players initially operated under the assumption that they were in a race to acquire data without regard for legal consequences, the government must now ensure transparency regarding these inputs.

Schiff also drew parallels between the current AI landscape and previous struggles to regulate social media. He noted that efforts to curb societal harms from social platforms were often stymied by First Amendment considerations. However, he argued that the threats posed by AI are more immediate and severe, necessitating faster and more robust legislative action than was achieved in the past.

Additionally, the conversation touched on the legal implications of the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which overturned the longstanding Chevron deference. Schiff warned that by removing the presumption that courts should defer to agency expertise, the new precedent could lead to immediate and prolonged litigation for any new regulatory bodies created to oversee AI.

When addressing the administration’s repeated justification of various policies through the lens of national security, Schiff expressed frustration over what he characterized as chaotic governance and self-dealing, including the use of taxpayer funds for presidential campaign advertisements and controversial projects such as the purported conversion of a triumphal arch for ammunition storage.

Schiff concluded that Congress must avoid repeating the delays experienced with social media regulation. He asserted that the government needs to act decisively to manage the risks associated with AI development, ranging from intellectual property rights to the safe deployment of powerful new technologies.