SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
ted lieu
Watchdog Denounces Trump AI Order Seen as Giveaway to Big Tech Billionaire Buddies Like David Sacks
"David Sacks and Big Tech want free rein to use our children as lab rats for AI experiments and President Trump keeps trying to give it to them."
Dec 08, 2025
President Donald Trump is drawing swift criticism after announcing he would be signing an executive order aimed at clamping down on state governments' powers to regulate the artificial intelligence industry.
In a Monday morning Truth Social post, Trump said that the order was needed to prevent a fragmented regulatory landscape for AI companies.
"We are beating ALL COUNTRIES at this point in the race, but that won’t last long if we are going to have 50 States, many of them bad actors, involved in RULES and the APPROVAL PROCESS," the president wrote. "THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT ABOUT THIS! AI WILL BE DESTROYED IN ITS INFANCY! I will be doing a ONE RULE Executive Order this week. You can’t expect a company to get 50 Approvals every time they want to do something."
Although specifics on the Trump AI executive order are not yet known, a draft order that has been circulating in recent weeks would instruct the US Department of Justice to file lawsuits against states that pass AI-related regulations with the ultimate goal of overturning them.
Emily Peterson-Cassin, policy director at watchdog Demand Progress, slammed Trump over the looming AI order, which she said was a giveaway to big tech industry billionaire backers such as David Sacks, a major Trump donor who currently serves as the administration's czar on AI and cryptocurrency.
"David Sacks and Big Tech want free rein to use our children as lab rats for AI experiments and President Trump keeps trying to give it to them," she said. "Right now, state laws are our best defense against AI chatbots that have sexual conversations with kids and even encourage them to harm themselves, deepfake revenge porn, and half-baked algorithms that make decisions about our employment and health care."
Peterson-Cassin went on to say that blocking state-level regulations of AI "only makes sense if the president’s goal is to please the Big Tech elites who helped pay for his campaign, his inauguration and his ballroom."
Rep. Pramila Jayapal (D-Wash.) also accused Trump of selling out Americans to do the bidding of Silicon Valley oligarchs.
"This is a direct ask from Big Tech lobbyists (who also donated millions to Trump’s campaign and ballroom) who only care about their own profits, not our safety," Jayapal wrote in a social media post. "States must be able to regulate AI to protect Americans."
Some critics of the Trump AI order questioned whether it had any legal weight behind it. Travis Hall, the director for state engagement at the Center for Democracy and Technology, told the New York Times that Trump's order should not hinder state governments from passing and enforcing AI industry regulations going forward.
“The president cannot pre-empt state laws through an executive order, full stop,” Hall argued. “Pre-emption is a question for Congress, which they have considered and rejected, and should continue to reject.”
Matthew Stoller, an antitrust advocate and researcher at the American Economic Liberties Project, also expressed doubt that Trump's order would be effective at blocking state AI regulations.
"Trump can issue an executive order mandating it rain today, it doesn't really matter though," said Stoller.
Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.) predicted the Trump order would be repeatedly struck down in courts.
"Trump’s one rule executive order on AI will fail," Lieu posted on social media. "Executive orders cannot create law. Only Congress can do so. That’s why Trump tried twice (and failed) to put AI preemption into law. Courts will rule against the EO because it will largely be based on a bill that failed."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Calls for Waltz's Resignation Grow Amid Report of At Least 20 Sensitive Signal Group Chats
"There must be accountability for this administration's dangerous disregard for our national security," said one Democratic congressman and former military prosecutor.
Apr 02, 2025
U.S. National Security Adviser Mike Waltz and members of his staff have created at least 20 group chats on the encrypted messaging app Signal to coordinate official work on sensitive policy issues around the world, four people who were added to such groups told Politico.
Waltz was already under fire for a group chat about the U.S. bombing Yemen when the report broke. Politico's Dasha Burns wrote on Wednesday that "none of the four individuals said they were aware of whether any classified information was shared, but all said that posts in group chats did include sensitive details of national security work."
The anonymous sources told Politico that the group chats involved policy issues involving China, Ukraine, Gaza, the Middle East, Europe, and Africa. One of them said, "It was commonplace to stand up chats on any given national security topic," one of the four sources told the outlet.
The Politico article comes a day after The Washington Post reported that Waltz and other members of President Donald Trump's National Security Council conducted official government business via their personal Gmail accounts, which are far less secure than Signal chats.
The fresh revelations also come as "Signalgate"—in which Waltz, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth, and other top Trump administration officials added a journalist to a Signal group chat about plans to bomb Yemen—still smolders.
Calls for Waltz's resignation or firing, which were already numerous in the wake of Signalgate, mounted Wednesday.
Resign.
[image or embed]
— Senator Ed Markey ( @markey.senate.gov) April 2, 2025 at 2:26 PM
"Waltz must resign. Hegseth must resign," Rep. Ted Lieu (D-Calif.), a member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, said on the social media site Bluesky. "There must be accountability for this administration's dangerous disregard for our national security."
Referring to the Signal group chats, Rep. Jimmy Gomez (D-Calif.) asked on the social media site X, "How many more are there?"
"Even Trump allies say this doesn't pass the smell test," he added. "National Security Adviser Waltz and Pete Hegseth need to be fired."
Keep ReadingShow Less
AOC Leads Call for DOJ Probe of Clarence Thomas Over 'Blatant Disregard for Judicial Ethics'
"No one is above the law," the New York Democrat asserted. "For two decades, Justice Thomas failed to report millions in gifts."
Aug 11, 2023
A day after several House Democrats urged U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas to resign following fresh reporting on undisclosed luxury vacations he accepted from wealthy Republican donors, Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez on Friday led a letter calling on the Department of Justice to investigate the right-wing judge's failure to report "significant gifts" from billionaires "in defiance of his duty under federal law."
"For close to two decades, Justice Thomas repeatedly certified that his financial disclosures were 'accurate, true, and complete,' despite omitting millions of dollars in gifts," the office of Ocasio-Cortez (D-N.Y.) said in a statement. "Justices of the Supreme Court are required to file annual reports disclosing gifts, and the failure to do so carries a legal penalty under the Ethics of Government Act of 1978."
According to the letter—which was also signed by Democratic Reps. Jerry Nadler (N.Y.), Jamie Raskin (Md.), Hank Johnson (Ga.), and Ted Lieu (Calif.)—"Justice Thomas' consistent failure to disclose gifts and benefits from industry magnates and wealthy, politically active executives highlights a blatant disregard for judicial ethics as well as apparent legal violations."
The letter continues:
No individual, regardless of their position or stature, should be exempt from legal scrutiny for lawbreaking. The integrity of our judicial system hinges on the impartiality and transparency of its members. As a Supreme Court justice and high constitutional officer, Justice Thomas should be held to the highest standard, not the lowest—and he certainly shouldn't be allowed to violate federal law. Refusing to hold him accountable would set a dangerous precedent, undermining public trust in our institutions and raising legitimate questions about the equal application of laws in our nation.
ProPublica reported Thursday that Thomas has accepted at least 38 luxury vacations funded by ultrawealthy executives and Republican donors—some with business interests before the Supreme Court. The outlet noted that "while some of the hospitality, such as stays in personal homes, may not have required disclosure, Thomas appears to have violated the law by failing to disclose flights, yacht cruises, and expensive sports tickets."
Ocasio-Cortez and other congressional Democrats have previously called for Thomas' impeachment over ethical issues including his unsigned dissent in a case involving the January 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol by supporters of former Republican President Donald Trump, who is facing federal charges for trying to overturn his 2020 election loss. The justice's wife, GOP operative Ginni Thomas, allegedly lobbied state lawmakers in Arizona to help rig the election for Trump.
Critics have lamented that the Supreme Court—alone among the three co-equal branches of the federal government—is not subjected to a binding code of ethics. Last month, the Democrat-led Senate Judiciary Committee advanced legislation led by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.) that would compel the high court to adopt an enforceable code of ethics. The measure advanced with no Republican support and is unlikely to pass the full Senate and GOP-controlled House.
ProPublica has also exposed a luxury fishing vacation in Alaska that another right-wing justice, Dobbs v. Jackson author Samuel Alito, accepted from a billionaire hedge fund manager who has repeatedly had business before the court.
Additionally, Politico's Heidi Przybyla reported earlier this year that Justice Neil Gorsuch, another member of the high court's conservative supermajority, in 2017 sold a property to the head of a law firm subsequently involved in over 20 cases before the court.
Last month, an Associated Press investigation also revealed that liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor's staff "has often prodded public institutions that have hosted the justice to buy her memoir or children's books, works that have earned her at least $3.7 million since she joined the court in 2009."
Thomas and Alito have argued they don't have to disclose gifts they've received, even from people who have or have had cases before the Supreme Court. Critics derided Thomas for claiming that he was advised by colleagues to not report the largesse of billionaire GOP megadonor Harlan Crow and others from whom he accepted gifts.
"Thomas must resign and Congress must pass a binding code of ethics for Supreme Court justices."
Meanwhile, Chief Justice John Roberts has rebuffed demands from congressional Democrats and others to investigate allegations of unethical and possibly illegal conduct by Thomas and Alito, while refusing an invitation to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee over the accusations.
Responding to the latest ProPublica reporting, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) wrote Thursday on the social media site formerly known as Twitter that "Thomas' behavior is unconscionable."
"Americans deserve better from their highest court," Warren added. "We need binding ethics rules for SCOTUS now."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular