Trump administration’s new artificial intelligence plan focuses on deregulation, beating China
Photo by Anna Moneymaker/Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — The White House on Wednesday released its promised “AI Action Plan,” a sweeping set of policy proposals aimed at boosting the United States’ goal for dominance in artificial intelligence through sweeping deregulation.
The plan was developed by the Trump administration’s AI and crypto czar, David Sacks, and the Office of Science and Technology Policy.
The 24-page plan outlines over 90 federal actions focused on three areas of focus: increasing private-sector innovation, expanding AI-related infrastructure and exporting American AI. It follows President Donald Trump’s January executive order directing the creation of an “AI Action Plan” within 180 days.
The proposals appear to break from the Biden administration’s more safety-first AI framework, but White House officials cast the strategy as essential to “winning the AI race” against global competitors, especially China.
The new plan comes as consumer advocates warn it gives tech companies outsized influence and effectively lets them write their own rules. Public Citizen called it “a corporate giveaway.
“The Trump administration’s reckless AI agenda prioritizes corporate profits over public safety. The administration plans to give billions to Big Tech so they can burn even more dirty energy, release untested products, and rush into the AI era without accountability to the American public,” the group said in a statement.
Trump is expected to issue executive orders tied to the plan’s priorities. The president on Wednesday will appear at the “Winning the AI Race” event, hosted by the Hill and Valley Forum and the All‑In podcast, which is co-hosted by Sacks.
Key pillars of the White House’s AI plan
The plan aims to accelerate AI Innovation by cutting regulations, pushing for private-sector adoption of AI technologies and relying on the private sector to recommend regulatory barriers to cut.
Building and expanding AI infrastructure in America is also among the priorities of the proposal. This means fast-tracking permits for the creation of data centers, removing diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) and climate requirements, as well as investing in AI-related workforce training.
Additionally, the plan recommends, in the name of protecting “free speech” and “American values,” to remove references to misinformation, DEI and climate change from federal AI safety guidelines.
The plan, however, does not address the use of copyrighted data for AI training, which has emerged as a key issue for AI and the basis for lawsuits. When asked about this, a senior official told ABC News the issue is currently before the courts and beyond the scope of executive action, stating: “Fair use is the law of the land.”
(WASHINGTON) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth is testifying before a House panel on Tuesday, his first time on Capitol Hill since being sworn in five months ago and as questions swirl about the deployment of troops to Los Angeles as part of an immigration crackdown.
Hegseth is appearing before the House Appropriations Defense Subcommittee alongside Gen. Dan Caine, chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff, and acting Pentagon Comptroller Bryn Woollacott MacDonnell to discuss the administration’s upcoming 2026 budget request.
During the hearing, Hegseth is widely expected to dodge many of the specifics on the military’s spending blueprint, which has not been released, and instead highlight recent gains in recruiting numbers and new technology initiatives in the Army.
But overshadowing much of his testimony will be the Pentagon’s decision to send some 4,800 troops, including 700 Marines, to Los Angeles following several days of clashes between protesters and law enforcement there. The troops, known as Task Force 51, are being called under a law known as Title 10, which allows the president to send military forces to protect federal property and personnel.
Gen. Eric Smith, commandant of the Marine Corps, is scheduled to testify separately Tuesday before the Senate Armed Services Committee.
On the eve of Hegseth’s testimony, Rep. Betty McCollum of Minnesota, the top Democrat on the House Defense Appropriations Subcommittee, accused President Donald Trump of deliberately escalating the situation in Los Angeles by pushing for military reinforcements not requested by California Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom. She called the decision to send Marines in particular “outrageous.”
“The active duty military has absolutely no legal role in domestic law enforcement. President Trump and Secretary Hegseth should read the Constitution and follow the law,” she said.
The Pentagon has not had a news conference since the deployment of troops to Los Angeles, referring reporters with questions about the mission to Hegseth’s posts on X.
On X, Hegseth said the troops were needed to protect federal immigration officers and detention buildings.
“There is plenty of room for peaceful protest, but ZERO tolerance for attacking federal agents who are doing their job. The National Guard, and Marines if need be, stand with ICE,” Hegseth said in a statement.
U.S. officials said the troops would carry guns and ammunition separately for use only in self-defense and to protect federal property. They would not patrol the streets or help law enforcement arrest protesters, the officials said.
Unclear is whether Trump is preparing to invoke the Insurrection Act, an 1807 law that says the president can call on a militia or the U.S. armed forces if there’s been “any insurrection, domestic violence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy” in a state that “opposes or obstructs the execution of the laws of the United States or impedes the course of justice under those laws.”
On his Truth Social platform on Sunday, Trump referred to the L.A. protesters as “violent, insurrectionist mobs” and “paid insurrectionists.”
When asked if Hegseth had spoken with President Donald Trump on Monday, Pentagon press secretary Kingsley Wilson told ABC News, “the secretary is in regular contact with the president regarding the National Guard presence in Los Angeles.”
Following his testimony, Hegseth is expected to travel with the president to Fort Bragg in North Carolina on Tuesday to participate in activities tied to the Army’s 250th birthday celebration.
Under Hegseth, the military has taken over control of hundreds of miles along the U.S. southern border with Mexico in an effort to tamp down unauthorized entry by migrants. He’s also eliminated programs aimed at increasing diversity among military personnel, slashed the number of general officers and initiated efforts to build a $175 billion U.S. missile defense shield.
At the same time, Hegseth also faces reports of dysfunction and infighting among his personal staff at the Pentagon. Since his Jan. 25 swearing in, Hegseth has fired or sidelined several of his own top political advisers and he’s gone without a chief of staff since April.
Tuesday’s hearing also would be Hegseth’s first appearance since revelations that he relied on a commercial messaging app known as Signal to relay details about a pending military attack to other high-ranking officials and others, including his wife. Hegseth’s use of Signal is now under internal investigation by the Defense Department’s inspector general.
(MADISON, WI) — — A number of high-profile Democratic governors are ready to fight — ardently throwing support behind their colleagues who have said they will draw new Congressional maps to favor Democrats before the 2026 midterm elections in order to directly counter Texas Republicans’ moves to do the same for their party.
Texas GOP lawmakers just this week released their first draft of the state’s new congressional map that could flip three to five Democratic seats in next year’s midterms.
On Thursday, California Gov. Gavin Newsom promptly responded, saying he’d spoken with state legislators and members of Congress about holding a special statewide election on Nov. 4 for Californians to vote on new congressional maps — ones that would likely favor Democrats.
Convening later in the week for a summer policy retreat on the shores of Madison, Wisconsin, a number of leading Democratic governors have backed Newsom and any other blue state leaders who are taking an offensive position on redistricting.
The Democrats each did so reluctantly, calling Texas Republicans’ efforts “unconstitutional” and “un-American” with hopes that the courts intervene before any new maps steered by either party are implemented. In the meantime, they said it’s time to fight against the Trump-championed GOP redistricting, especially now that other Republican-led states, including Missouri, might follow suit.
“That is so un-American, and it’s a constant threat to our democracy,” Wisconsin Gov. Tony Evers said about Republican proposals. “So I’m really pissed, frankly, and we are going to do whatever we can do to stop this from happening.”
Gov. Laura Kelly of Kansas, the Chair of the Democratic Governors Association, explicitly got behind Newsom, Kathy Hochul of New York, JB Pritzker of Illinois and any other governors who are weighing counteraction through special elections, special sessions or additional means of redrawing congressional maps.
“I have never believed in unilateral disarmament, and so while I may not want to participate in certain activities, if I have to, in order to level the playing field, I would support my Democratic colleagues who decide to answer in kind,” Kelly said in an interview.
“If the other side is going to pursue this, regardless of the obvious unconstitutionality of it, then I don’t think we have any other choice but to go there. You just don’t go to the front lines without your bullets,” Kelly said.
Kelly said her strong “preference” would still be for courts to intervene. “In fact, it might actually work to our benefit, you know, to play like this. Okay, we’ll play this game too, and we all go to court.”
Then, Kelly said, “we all lose.”
The process of redistricting could prove to be an uphill battle for Democrats, who have less of an opportunity to gerrymander nationwide than their peers across the aisle because of the varied rules of each state.
It’s the responsibility of partisan legislatures in many Republican-led states to draw the boundaries of all electoral districts. Many more Democratic states use independent citizen-redistricting commissions — a practice used to maintain fairness and combat gerrymandering.
“I do worry,” Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz said during the press conference in Madison, about the outcome for Democrats if they decide to get in the redistricting fight.
But, Kelly jumped in, “there’s a bigger risk in doing nothing.”
“You know, we can’t just let this happen and act like it’s fine and hope that the courts fix it. We have no idea, quite honestly, at this point, what the courts might do, but by virtue of us responding in kind, we do send a message,” Kelly added. “We will put up a fight.”
Evers, who campaigned for governor twice on ending gerrymandering in Wisconsin — culminating with their Supreme Court’s decision to strike down the state’s non-contiguous state legislative maps as unconstitutional — said that Wisconsin would not be making any changes to their maps. Other states, though, who may be “up against the wall” should make modifications, Evers said.
“We’re not changing our maps. Here in the state of Wisconsin, we worked hard to get fair maps, and we’re going to continue to do so … in my heart of hearts, this is where we have to be. But when … you have a gun against your head, you got to do something,” Evers said.
Govs. Kelly, Walz, and a number of other Democratic governors also said they’d steer clear of redrawing their maps this cycle, either because they lead predominantly Republican states or because their redistricting processes wouldn’t allow for a swift process to combat current GOP efforts.
The idea of retaliating against Republicans on the matter of redistricting is a notable shift in strategy for Democrats, who have long touted their reverence for “playing by the rules” on constitutional issues.
For years, Democrats have championed independent redistricting and rules meant to encourage fairer maps are now holding them back in some areas and making it more challenging for them in certain districts.
“Democrats are expected to have the decorum. We’re expected to protect the institution. We’re expected to follow the rules on this,” Walz said, saying time for the party to go aggressively on offense to combat the Trump administration.
“We’re not playing with a normal administration. We’re playing one that is throwing all the rules out of there, and if the courts that he has packed aren’t going to do that, then I think it is incumbent upon states that have the capacity or the ability to make sure that we are responding in kind,” said Walz. “It is a terrible spot we’re in as a country, but not responding is going to make it even worse.”
(WASHINGTON) — President Donald Trump on Tuesday suggested a federal takeover of New York City and Washington.
The comments came when Trump, during a meeting of his Cabinet at the White House, was asked about New York City’s upcoming mayoral election.
Trump attacked Democratic candidate Zohran Mamdani, who describes himself as a democratic socialist, and ticked through the other contenders, including Eric Adams, Andrew Cuomo and Curtis Sliwa, though he declined to endorse anyone.
“We’re not going to have — if a communist gets elected to run New York, it can never be the same. But we have tremendous power at the White House to run places when we have to,” Trump said.
Trump didn’t elaborate on what authority that would be as he then turned his focus to the nation’s capital.
“We could run D.C. We’re looking at D.C. We don’t want crime in D.C. We want the city to run well,” he said. He said his chief of staff, Susie Wiles, was working with Washington Mayor Muriel Bowser.
Trump has long called for the federal government to takeover Washington, complaining that local leaders weren’t effective and arguing the city has become riddled with crime.
According to preliminary data from the Metropolitan Police Department, violent crime is down 25% from this time last year and all crime is down 8%.
“We would run it so good, it would be run so proper, we’d get the best person to run it,” Trump said about Washington on Tuesday. “And we know the crime would be down to a minimum, would be much less. And, you know, we’re thinking about doing it, to be honest with you.”
“We want a capital that’s run flawlessly, and it wouldn’t be hard for us to do it. And we’ve had a good relationship with the mayor and we’re testing it to see if it works,” he said.
The district has some autonomy under the 1973 Home Rule Act, which grants residents the ability to manage affairs by electing a mayor and city council members. But final oversight of the district’s laws and budget are left to Congress. In 2023, for example, the U.S. House of Representatives blocked two local bills from going into effect, including one that would have updated the district’s criminal code.
Trump circled back to talking about New York City, railing against the city’s ranked-choice voting and describing his relationship with Mayor Adams as a “test.”
“New York City will run properly,” he said. “We’re going to bring New York back.”
