The SB53, AI Safety and Transparency Bill, which California village Gavin Newsom has signed in the law this week, is proof that state regulation is not a hindrance to AI progress.
Therefore, in today’s Equity episodes, Adam Bilan, vice -president of public policy in the youth -led advocacy group, said.
“The reality is that policy makers themselves know that we have to do something, and they know by working on one million other issues that is a way to pass the law that actually protects innovation – which I care about – making sure that these products are safe,” Bilon told Techcrunch.
At its core, SB53 is the first-in-the-nation bill, with large AI labs need to be transparent about their safety and safety protocols-especially how they prevent their models from terrible risks, such as used to cybercat on a significant infrastructure or to manufacture biodiversity. The law also states that companies stick to the protocols that will be implemented by the office of emergency services.
“Companies are already doing the goods that we ask them to do in this bill,” Bilon told Techcrunch. “They conduct safety tests on their models. They issue model cards. Are they starting to skimp in some areas in some companies? Yes. And that’s why such bills are important.”
Bilan also said that some AI firms have a policy around giving comfort to safety standards under competitive pressure. For example, Openai has publicly stated that it can “adjust” its safety requirements if a rival AI labs issues a high -risk system without similar security measures. Bilan argues that policy can implement the existing security promises of companies, which can prevent them from cutting corners under competitive or financial pressure.
While the public opposition to SB53 was muted compared to its predecessor SB 1047, which was veto by Newsom last year, rhetoric in Silicon Valley and most of the AI Labs has been an AINEMA for almost any AI regulation progress and will eventually beat America in its race.
Techcrunch event
San francisco
,
27-29 October, 2025
Why is it that VCs like Meta, Andresen Horovitz and powerful individuals like OpenEII Greg Brockman are collectively pumping hundreds of millions of people in the Super PAC to return Pro-AI politicians in the state elections. And this is the reason that earlier this year the same forces pushed the AI for adjournment, which banned the states from regulating AI for 10 years.
Encode AI launched an alliance of over 200 organizations to work to attack the proposal, but Bilon says the fight is not over. Senator Ted Cruise, who made the Midnight Champion, is trying to achieve a new strategy to achieve the same goal of federal prefination of state laws. In September, Cruise introduced Sandbox actWhich will allow AI companies to apply for exemption to temporarily bypass some federal rules for up to 10 years. Bilan has also estimated an upcoming bill of the installation of an federal AI standard that will be picked as a middle-land solution, but will actually override state laws.
He warned that narrowly federal AI law “can remove federalism for the most important technique of our time.”
“If you told me that SB 53 was the bill that would replace all state bills on AI and everything related to all possible risks, I will tell you that it is probably not a very good idea and this bill is designed for a special subgroup of things,” Bilan said.
While she agrees that the AI race matters with China, and policy makers need to implement regulation that supports American progress, says that killing state bills – which mainly focus on deepfec, transparency, algorithm discrimination, children’s safety and government use of AI – there is no way to go to do so.
He said, “What are the bills like SB53 that will stop us from defeating China? No,” he said. “I think it is really intellectually dishonest to say that it is the thing that will stop us in the race.”
He said: “If you care about, she is beating China in the race on AI – and I care about it – so the things you will push for, they are like export controls in Congress,” Bilan said. “You will ensure that American companies have chips. But it is not what the industry is insisting.”
Like legislative proposal Chip safety act To prevent the turn of advanced AI chips in China through export control and tracking devices, and the existing chips and science act attempts to promote domestic chip production. However, some major technical companies, including OpenEAI and Nvidia, have expressed reluctance or opposition to some aspects of these efforts, cited as concerns EffectivenessCompetition, and security weaknesses.
Its reasons for NVIDIA – this is a strong financial incentive to continue selling chips to China, which is Historical Represented an important part of its global revenue. Bilan estimated that chip exports could return to advocacy to live in good grace of important suppliers such as OpenIAI NVidia.
An inconsistent message has also been given from the Trump administration. Three months after expanding the export ban on advanced AI chips in China in April 2025, the administration reversed the course, allowing NVDia and AMD to allow China to sell some chips in exchange for 15% of revenue.
“You see people on the hill moving towards bills such as Chip Safety Act that will put export control over China,” Bilon said. “Meanwhile, the story continues to continue the story to kill the bills that are really quite mild.”
Bilan said that SB53 is an example of democracy in action – industry and policy makers worked together to get a version of a bill, which everyone could agree. It is “very ugly and dirty,” but “This process of democracy and federalism is a complete foundation for our country and our economic system, and I hope we will continue to do it successfully.”
“I think SB53 is one of the best proof points that can still work,” he said.
This article was first published on 1 October.
