Gavin Newsom vs. AI
How SB 53 Turns Foreign Standards Into California Law—And California Law Into National Policy
By Van
Gavin Newsom didn’t sign SB 53 because he’s worried that OpenAI will accidentally summon Skynet.
He signed it because SB 53 gives Sacramento something the Constitution never intended a state to possess:
The power to outsource lawmaking to unelected global committees—and then impose those foreign-written rules on the entire American AI frontier.
SB 53 is not a safety bill. It’s an international regulatory laundering machine with “transparency” decals slapped on the packaging.
And once you understand how the “national and international standards” clause works, you see the whole strategy.
1. SB 53 Makes Global Bureaucrats Into Shadow Lawmakers
The heart of SB 53 is simple and brutal:
Frontier AI developers must publish a safety framework that incorporates “national standards, international standards, and industry-consensus best practices.”
On its face, that sounds harmless. Responsible. Mature.
Here’s the real translation:
Whatever ISO, OECD, NIST, UN, or EU bureaucrats write becomes a de facto legal obligation in California for every major AI company.
SB 53 imports those standards automatically, without:
a vote in the California Legislature,
a vote in the U.S. Congress,
Senate treaty ratification,
or any constitutional process whatsoever.
It is the cleanest end-run around democratic lawmaking I’ve seen in the AI space—and I’ve seen some shameless stuff.
**2. Who approves the incorporated standards?
Nobody elected. And that’s the whole trick.**
SB 53 has no approval procedure for the standards it forces companies to obey.
None.
There is:
no legislative vote,
no agency rulemaking,
no constitutional check,
no oversight body,
no democratic accountability.
Instead, the “approvers” are:
ISO committees in Geneva,
OECD working groups in Paris,
EU bureaucrats writing AI Act guidance,
UN technocrats writing “principles,”
NIST subcommittees you never heard of,
NGO activists sitting on expert panels,
corporate delegates whose incentives you don’t share,
California judges adjudicating deviations,
California AGs and plaintiffs’ attorneys enforcing deviations.
Everyone except the people the Constitution empowers to make law.
3. How SB 53 Launders Foreign Standards Into California Law
Here’s how the laundering works:
Step 1 — A global body publishes a “voluntary” AI standard.
ISO, OECD, or the EU releases a document with “guidance” or a “best practice.”
Step 2 — SB 53 forces labs to show how they “incorporate” that standard.
If you deviate, you must publicly justify it.
Your explanation becomes Exhibit A in future litigation.
Step 3 — Courts, AGs, and plaintiffs treat the standard as binding.
“Why didn’t you follow internationally recognized best practices?”
Suddenly the voluntary PDF becomes a mandatory compliance benchmark.
Step 4 — California bureaucracies begin treating the standard as the norm.
The Department of Technology updates definitions to match “national and international standards.”
The Office of Emergency Services receives incident reports referencing those standards.
Step 5 — The standard becomes the California baseline.
Not because California voted on it.
Because SB 53 piggybacked on it.
This is lawmaking by reference, engineered to bypass the Constitution’s checks.
4. Newsom’s Real Goal: Make California the Federal Blueprint
Newsom didn’t hide the ambition.
He bragged about it.
California, he said, has a “unique opportunity” to create a “blueprint” for AI governance beyond our borders.
California must “fill the gap” left by Congress.
His 2025 AI report outright frames SB 53 as the model for national standards.
This isn’t California minding its own business.
This is California acting as:
de facto federal regulator,
de facto international compliance enforcer,
and de facto standards integrator for American AI.
When Congress eventually stirs itself, Newsom wants to hand Washington a ready-made California framework and say:
“Everyone’s already following this. Make it federal.”
That’s the plan.
5. SB 53 Is an Article II Violation Wearing Progressive Clothes
The Constitution says:
Foreign policy? Federal.
Treaty-making? Federal.
National standards? Federal.
Interstate commerce? Federal.
SB 53 obliterates the spirit of all four:
It pulls foreign standards into domestic law through state compulsion.
It makes California courts enforce standards written overseas.
It forces American AI firms to obey rules California has no sovereign right to write or negotiate.
It lets Sacramento back-door international agreements without federal ratification.
This is the kind of state-level freelancing the Framers feared—where individual states undermine national sovereignty by aligning with external powers.
SB 53 doesn’t sign a treaty.
It just makes one functionally binding.
That’s the loophole.
6. The Ratchet: Why This Only Tightens
Even if SB 53 began moderate, the structure is a ratchet:
Every new ISO/OECD/EU/NIST update becomes pressure to tighten your framework.
Every framework becomes evidence in litigation.
Every litigation risk pushes labs toward stricter conformance.
Every conformance becomes argument for federal adoption.
Nothing loosens.
Everything tightens.
This is how you build a slow nationalization mechanism that nobody voted for.
7. And the Punchline: California Becomes America’s AI Regulator by Default
Ask a frontier lab what’s easier:
Build one safety framework for California and then port it everywhere?
Or maintain separate regimes?
No one is building 50 frameworks.
They’ll build one: the California-aligned one.
And just like that:
California’s interpretation of global standards becomes the U.S. default.
ISO/NIST/EU/OECD become the upstream writers of American AI norms.
Congress is cut out entirely.
The Constitution is an afterthought.
SB 53 is not “California leading.”
It’s California bypassing the federal government to run AI standards through proxies no voter controls.
This is state-level globalism masquerading as “responsible innovation.”
8. Bottom Line
SB 53 is not about safety.
It’s about jurisdiction.
It does not regulate AI.
It regulates sovereignty.
It is:
a laundering mechanism for global standards
a constitutional end-run around federal authority
a vehicle for California to dictate national AI norms
a covert foreign-policy instrument
a ratchet that tightens every time a foreign committee updates a PDF
and a blueprint for how a governor can act like a federal regulator without ever leaving Sacramento
This is Newsom vs. AI and the Constitution—
and unless someone stops this machinery, he wins.