In a significant decision for the artificial intelligence industry, California Governor Gavin Newsom vetoed SB 1047, a controversial AI safety bill that would have imposed strict regulations on AI developers operating in the state. The bill, which passed the California legislature in September 2024, aimed to establish comprehensive safety standards for large-scale AI models and hold companies accountable for potential harms caused by their AI systems.
SB 1047 would have required AI companies developing models costing over $100 million to train to implement rigorous safety testing protocols, create kill switches for their AI systems, and face potential liability for damages caused by their technology. The legislation represented one of the most ambitious attempts by any U.S. state to regulate artificial intelligence development and deployment.
Governor Newsom’s veto came after intense lobbying from both sides of the debate. Major tech companies and AI startups argued that the bill would stifle innovation, drive AI development out of California, and impose unrealistic compliance burdens on the industry. Silicon Valley leaders warned that overly restrictive regulations could hand competitive advantages to other states or countries with less stringent oversight.
Conversely, AI safety advocates, researchers, and some prominent technologists supported the bill, arguing that proactive regulation is necessary to prevent catastrophic risks from advanced AI systems. They contended that voluntary safety commitments from AI companies are insufficient and that California, as a global AI hub, has a responsibility to lead on safety standards.
In his veto message, Newsom acknowledged the legitimate concerns about AI safety but expressed reservations about the bill’s approach. He suggested that the legislation was too broad in some areas and too narrow in others, potentially creating a false sense of security while missing emerging AI risks. The Governor indicated his administration would continue working with legislators and stakeholders to develop more targeted AI safety measures.
The veto represents a major victory for the AI industry but leaves unresolved questions about how California and other jurisdictions will address AI safety concerns. The debate over SB 1047 has highlighted the tension between fostering innovation and implementing precautionary safeguards in one of the world’s fastest-moving technology sectors.
Key Quotes
While well-intentioned, SB 1047 does not take into account whether an AI system is deployed in high-risk environments, involves critical decision-making or the use of sensitive data.
Governor Newsom explained his reasoning for vetoing the bill in his official statement, suggesting the legislation’s approach was too blunt and didn’t adequately distinguish between different types of AI applications and risk levels.
This bill would have made California the first state in the nation to establish comprehensive safety standards for large-scale AI models.
Supporters of SB 1047 emphasized the historic nature of the legislation, positioning California as a potential leader in AI safety regulation before the veto derailed those plans.
Our Take
Newsom’s veto reveals the fundamental challenge facing AI regulation: balancing innovation with safety in a rapidly evolving field where the risks remain largely theoretical but potentially catastrophic. The Governor’s decision reflects the political reality that no state wants to be seen as driving a lucrative industry elsewhere, even when legitimate safety concerns exist. This outcome suggests that meaningful AI regulation may require federal action rather than state-by-state approaches, as individual states face too much competitive pressure to impose strict requirements. However, the intense debate around SB 1047 has elevated AI safety in the public consciousness and forced companies to articulate their safety commitments more clearly. The veto isn’t the end of this conversation—it’s likely just the beginning of a longer regulatory journey as AI capabilities continue advancing.
Why This Matters
This decision has profound implications for AI regulation not just in California but across the United States and globally. California is home to many of the world’s leading AI companies and research institutions, making it a bellwether for AI policy. Newsom’s veto signals that even in progressive states, policymakers remain hesitant to impose strict regulations that might impede the AI industry’s growth.
The outcome affects how AI companies will approach safety and accountability going forward. Without mandatory requirements, the industry will likely continue relying on voluntary commitments and self-regulation, which critics argue may be inadequate for managing existential risks. This decision also influences the broader conversation about AI governance, as federal lawmakers and international bodies watch California’s approach closely. The veto may embolden AI companies to resist similar regulations elsewhere, while simultaneously energizing safety advocates to push for stronger measures. For businesses investing in AI, this creates continued regulatory uncertainty, as the question of how and when governments will intervene in AI development remains unresolved.
Recommended Reading
For those interested in learning more about artificial intelligence, machine learning, and effective AI communication, here are some excellent resources:
Recommended Reading
Related Stories
- Outlook Uncertain as US Government Pivots to Full AI Regulations
- OpenAI CEO Sam Altman Hints at Potential Restructuring in 2024
- The AI Hype Cycle: Reality Check and Future Expectations
- Artificial General Intelligence Could Arrive by 2024, According to AI Experts
Source: https://www.cnn.com/2024/09/29/tech/newsom-california-ai-safety-bill/index.html