Global AI Monitor
Preview

United States – California (US-CA) · Module Detail

United States – California: General-Purpose AI

#

Executive Order 14409 - Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security (Adopted 2026-06-02; entry into force not recorded): Federal executive order directing agencies to improve cyber defence, create a voluntary frontier-model deployment framework built on a classified cyber benchmark, and protect against criminal actors; states it does not authorise mandatory licensing or preclearance.

4 instruments · 5 obligations · 20 claims · Next: (GovOps/Cal OES recommendations on frontier AI safety amendments due to Governor)

4 instruments (3 current) · 5 obligations · 20 claims · 4 milestones

Instruments

  • Executive Order 14409 - Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security Adopted 2026-06-02; entry into force not recorded

    Federal executive order directing agencies to improve cyber defence, create a voluntary frontier-model deployment framework built on a classified cyber benchmark, and protect against criminal actors; states it does not authorise mandatory licensing or preclearance. It contains no text addressing state AI laws.

    Binding · Authority: The White House (President) · Verified · Official text
  • Executive Order N-9-26 - AI oversight, independent verification and kill-switch recommendations In force since 2026-09-18

    Directs the Government Operations Agency to accelerate SB 813 and AB 1405 implementation (May 1, 2027 and December 1, 2027) and, with Cal OES, to recommend stronger frontier AI safeguards by November 16, 2026.

    Binding · Authority: California Government Operations Agency (GovOps) · Verified · Official text
  • Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act (SB 53) In force since 2026-01-01

    Requires large frontier developers to publish and follow a frontier AI framework, publish transparency reports, and report critical safety incidents to Cal OES, with Attorney General civil penalties up to $1,000,000 per violation.

    Binding · Authority: California Department of Justice - Office of the Attorney General · Verified · Official text
  • SB 1047 - Safe and Secure Innovation for Frontier AI Models (vetoed 2024) Vetoed 2024-09-29 Not current

    Frontier-model safety bill that would have required developers and compute providers of large AI models to adopt safeguards and created a Board of Frontier Models; vetoed on 2024-09-29. SB 53 followed in 2025.

    Draft, no legal force · Authority: California State Legislature · Verified · Official text

Obligations

  • Bus. & Prof. Code § 22757.12(a)-(b)

    Large frontier developers must write, implement, comply with and publish a frontier AI framework, review it annually and republish material modifications within 30 days.

    risk management · Applies to: provider · Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act (SB 53)
  • Order ¶ 1

    GovOps must complete Government Code section 8898.1 requirements and post IVO application requirements, procedures and criteria no later than May 1, 2027.

    authorisation · Applies to: other · Executive Order N-9-26 - AI oversight, independent verification and kill-switch recommendations
  • Order ¶ 2

    GovOps must complete Government Code section 11549.82(a) requirements and begin the actions required by subdivision (b) no later than December 1, 2027.

    registration · Applies to: other · Executive Order N-9-26 - AI oversight, independent verification and kill-switch recommendations
  • Order ¶ 3

    GovOps, with Cal OES, must submit recommendations on embedding IVOs onsite, verified frameworks, kill-switch requirements and incident definitions no later than November 16, 2026.

    other · Applies to: other · Executive Order N-9-26 - AI oversight, independent verification and kill-switch recommendations
  • EO 14409 Sec. 3(a)

    Within 60 days of the order, Treasury, War (through NSA) and Homeland Security (through CISA), in consultation with White House and Commerce officials, must develop and maintain a classified benchmarking process to assess AI models' advanced cyber capabilities and set the threshold for designating a covered frontier model; the section creates no mandatory licensing requirement.

    risk management · Applies to: other · Executive Order 14409 - Promoting Advanced Artificial Intelligence Innovation and Security

Milestones

  • GovOps/Cal OES recommendations on frontier AI safety amendments due to Governor Upcoming
    Executive Order N-9-26 - AI oversight, independent verification and kill-switch recommendations
  • Department of Technology first annual recommendations on frontier definitions due Upcoming
    Transparency in Frontier Artificial Intelligence Act (SB 53)
  • GovOps completes Gov. Code section 8898.1 requirements (IVO application requirements and criteria) Upcoming
    Executive Order N-9-26 - AI oversight, independent verification and kill-switch recommendations
  • GovOps completes Gov. Code section 11549.82(a) requirements (AI Auditor Registry) Upcoming
    Executive Order N-9-26 - AI oversight, independent verification and kill-switch recommendations
Claims and evidence (20)
  • SB 53 added Chapter 25.1 (TFAIA) to the Business and Professions Code, effective 2026-01-01.

    Confidence: Confirmed · As of 1 Jan 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • Derived: Probable TFAIA is codified law with civil penalties.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 1 Jan 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • TFAIA is effective January 1, 2026.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 1 Jan 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • A frontier model is a foundation model trained with more than 10^26 operations.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 1 Jan 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • A large frontier developer has more than $500,000,000 of annual gross revenues with affiliates.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 1 Jan 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • Derived: Probable Civil penalty does not exceed $1,000,000 per violation.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 1 Jan 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • SB 53 applies to frontier models, a subset of foundation models.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 1 Jan 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • Large frontier developers must publish a frontier AI framework, review it at least annually, and republish material modifications within 30 days.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 1 Jan 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • Frontier developers must report critical safety incidents to Cal OES within 15 days of discovery, or within 24 hours to an appropriate authority where there is imminent risk of death or serious physical injury.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 1 Jan 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • The Department of Technology must assess and recommend updates to the definitions of frontier model and frontier developer on or before January 1, 2027 and annually thereafter.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 1 Jan 2027 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • The Governor signed Executive Order N-9-26 on September 18, 2026.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 18 Sep 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • Binding on executive agencies; creates no enforceable private rights.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 18 Sep 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
    • Executive Order N-9-26 (signed 2026-09-18) T1 · retrieved · retrieved 8 Oct 2026 · Order ¶ 1No later than May 1, 2027, the Government Operations Agency shall complete the requirements of Section 8898.1 of the Government Code and develop application requirements, procedures, and criteria for independent verification organizations and publicly post them, as required by law.
    • Executive Order N-9-26 (signed 2026-09-18) T1 · retrieved · retrieved 8 Oct 2026 · Closing paragraphThis Order is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity
  • GovOps must complete Gov. Code section 8898.1 requirements by May 1, 2027 and section 11549.82(a) requirements by December 1, 2027, and submit frontier AI safety amendment recommendations by November 16, 2026.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 18 Sep 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
    • Executive Order N-9-26 (signed 2026-09-18) T1 · retrieved · retrieved 8 Oct 2026 · Order ¶ 1No later than May 1, 2027, the Government Operations Agency shall complete the requirements of Section 8898.1 of the Government Code and develop application requirements, procedures, and criteria for independent verification organizations and publicly post them, as required by law.
    • Executive Order N-9-26 (signed 2026-09-18) T1 · retrieved · retrieved 8 Oct 2026 · Order ¶ 2No later than December 1, 2027, the Government Operations Agency shall complete the requirements of subdivision (a) of Section 11549.82 of the Government Code
    • Executive Order N-9-26 (signed 2026-09-18) T1 · retrieved · retrieved 8 Oct 2026 · Order ¶ 3shall, no later than November 16, 2026, submit to my office recommendations, developed in consultation with national experts, addressing the technical feasibility and potential efficacy of amendments to existing state laws regarding AI safety and security
  • EO N-9-26 signed 2026-09-18.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 18 Sep 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
    • Executive Order N-9-26 (signed 2026-09-18) T1 · retrieved · retrieved 8 Oct 2026 · Signature blockIN WITNESS WHEREOF I have hereunto set my hand and caused the Great Seal of the State of California to be affixed this 18th day of September 2026.
  • Executive Order 14409 was issued on June 2, 2026.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 2 Jun 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • The order directs federal agencies and states it does not authorise mandatory licensing of AI models.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 2 Jun 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • EO 14409 sets up designation of covered frontier models and disclaims any mandatory licensing requirement.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 2 Jun 2026 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
  • SB 1047 was introduced in the California Legislature and did not become law.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 29 Sep 2024 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
    • Governor Newsom veto message - SB 1047 (2024-09-29) T1 · retrieved · retrieved 8 Oct 2026 · Veto message, openingSEP 2 9 2024 To the Members of the California State Senate: I am returning Senate Bill 1047 without my signature.
    • Governor Newsom veto message - SB 1047 (2024-09-29) T1 · retrieved · retrieved 8 Oct 2026 · Veto message, reasoningBy focusing only on the most expensive and large-scale models, SB 1047 establishes a regulatory framework that could give the public a false sense of security about controlling this fast-moving technology.
  • SB 1047 has no legal force.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 29 Sep 2024 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
    • Governor Newsom veto message - SB 1047 (2024-09-29) T1 · retrieved · retrieved 8 Oct 2026 · Veto message, openingSEP 2 9 2024 To the Members of the California State Senate: I am returning Senate Bill 1047 without my signature.
    • Governor Newsom veto message - SB 1047 (2024-09-29) T1 · retrieved · retrieved 8 Oct 2026 · Veto message, reasoningBy focusing only on the most expensive and large-scale models, SB 1047 establishes a regulatory framework that could give the public a false sense of security about controlling this fast-moving technology.
  • The Governor vetoed SB 1047 on 2024-09-29, saying a model-size threshold could give the public a false sense of security.

    Confidence: Probable · As of 29 Sep 2024 · evidenced
    Evidence and sources
    • Governor Newsom veto message - SB 1047 (2024-09-29) T1 · retrieved · retrieved 8 Oct 2026 · Veto message, openingSEP 2 9 2024 To the Members of the California State Senate: I am returning Senate Bill 1047 without my signature.
    • Governor Newsom veto message - SB 1047 (2024-09-29) T1 · retrieved · retrieved 8 Oct 2026 · Veto message, reasoningBy focusing only on the most expensive and large-scale models, SB 1047 establishes a regulatory framework that could give the public a false sense of security about controlling this fast-moving technology.