Leadership1 publisher2 min readPublished
California gives officials until November 16 to recommend AI safeguards, including a possible kill switch
Newsom's executive order sets a deadline for recommending the shutdown capability he vetoed in 2024, and the two audit laws he signed last week already give the state the inspectors such a rule would need.
The Board Room · Leadership desk
What happened
- Newsom signed an executive order on Friday convening state officials and outside experts, who have until November 16 to recommend further changes to California AI law.
- One idea under review would require developers of advanced models to build an emergency shutoff able to disable a model if serious safety problems emerge.
- The shutdown capability now under review was in legislation Newsom vetoed in 2024, which would have required certain powerful model developers to keep the ability to enact a full shutdown promptly.
Compiled by The Board RoomSomething wrong?How this is made
Why it matters
- decision Developers who want to argue about thresholds and scope have to make that case to a recommendation group before November 16.
- constraint If monitors sit inside labs, outside access to internal safety work becomes a standing arrangement. The company stops choosing when and how much of it to show.
- exposure Widening the list of critical safety incidents that must be reported turns internal escalations into filings, with the state deciding what qualifies.
- precedent Newsom wants California's rules to work as a federal baseline, so definitions written in Sacramento this autumn are the ones other jurisdictions would copy or fight.
An executive order can direct agencies and convene experts, but it cannot by itself put a shutdown duty on a model developer. CBS San Francisco reports that the order does not immediately require AI companies to install a kill switch [6]; what it fixes is a date, November 16, by which state officials and outside experts must recommend possible changes to California law [3]. Any binding requirement has to go through the legislature after that.
The two statutes signed last week are the part already in force. SB 813 creates a framework for independent organizations to assess AI systems for safety risks [8]. AB 1405 establishes a state registry and standards for AI auditors [9]. Friday's order is aimed at accelerating implementation of both [10]. Among the ideas the group will weigh, independent assessment and auditing rest on enacted law; the emergency shutoff rests on a recommendation [15].
The shutdown question itself is two years old in Sacramento. It was in legislation Newsom vetoed in 2024, which would have required developers of certain powerful AI models to maintain the capability to promptly enact a full shutdown [12]. "We're not waiting to act - we're going to speed up our work on substantial and responsible AI oversight before it's too late," Newsom said in a statement [11].
California has enacted several AI laws since the veto without anyone building a shutoff [14]. The group's remit runs wider than the shutoff. It is being asked whether independent monitors should be placed inside AI labs to conduct regular audits [5], and whether the state should require independent verification of companies' safety frameworks and risk reports [7]. Both questions concern statutes already passed, and the auditors who would do that work are to be registered under AB 1405 [9].
For a company building advanced models, no obligation changes this quarter. What gets settled by November 16 is the definitional work: which models fall in scope, and whether the 2024 language about maintaining the capability to promptly enact a full shutdown returns in the same words [12]. CBS did not report how the group will draw that scope. Newsom is also pressing for stronger federal AI regulation, arguing that California's rules could serve as a baseline for national standards [13].
What to watch
- Whether the November 16 recommendations name a threshold that defines which models are in scope.
- Whether a bill carrying a shutdown requirement is introduced next session, and whether it reuses the 2024 wording.
- Who the state certifies as auditors under AB 1405, and whether their access includes placement inside labs.