Industry·3 min read
By BitsMindsSource: Axios

Trump Pulls AI Safety Executive Order at the Last Minute After Calls From Musk, Zuckerberg, and Sacks

The 90-day voluntary frontier-model review was hours from signing when David Sacks, Elon Musk, and Mark Zuckerberg phoned Trump directly. Anthropic, OpenAI, and 79% of Republican voters had backed the order.

WHITE HOUSE · AI EXECUTIVE ORDER · MAY 22, 2026 BITSMINDS POSTPONED SIGNING CEREMONY 90-day voluntary review Frontier models · Treasury-led security testing Pulled hours before the signing — execs en route to D.C. LAST-MINUTE CALLS TO TRUMP DS David Sacks · ex-AI czar EM Elon Musk · xAI MZ Mark Zuckerberg · Meta 79% OF REPUBLICAN VOTERS backed government AI safety testing Future of Life Institute poll · May 2026 SUPPORTED THE ORDER Anthropic · OpenAI · Steve Bannon + 60 MAGA loyalists in open letter Source: Axios · Fortune · Washington Post
Share:

President Donald Trump abruptly postponed the signing of a long-awaited AI safety executive order on Thursday, May 22, leaving frontier-lab executives in the air on planes to Washington as the ceremony was scrubbed from the schedule. The reversal came after a coordinated series of late-night and early-morning calls to the president from xAI CEO Elon Musk, Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, and former White House AI and crypto czar David Sacks, according to reporting from Axios, Fortune, and the Washington Post.

The draft order would have established a voluntary mechanism for AI developers to submit frontier models to federal agencies up to 90 days before public release, with the Treasury Department — rather than CISA or NIST — taking the unusual lead on identifying and patching security vulnerabilities. The text explicitly ruled out mandatory licensing or pre-approval, but Sacks reportedly told Trump on Thursday morning that the voluntary structure would function as a "de facto licensing regime" and warned that a future administration could easily flip the same machinery into a mandatory pre-clearance system.

Speaking to reporters later that morning, Trump confirmed the postponement on competitiveness grounds: "I didn't like certain aspects of it. I think it gets in the way of — we're leading China. We're leading everybody, and I didn't want to do anything that's going to get in the way of that." The framing matched arguments long pushed by Musk and Sacks, both of whom have publicly argued that any U.S. AI safety regime hands a structural advantage to Beijing-backed labs that face no equivalent pre-release scrutiny.

The reversal exposes a striking split inside the president's own coalition. Anthropic and OpenAI had both publicly indicated they would cooperate with the 90-day review window — Anthropic co-founder Jack Clark used an Oxford lecture the same week to call for exactly the kind of pre-deployment evaluations the order would have formalized. On the MAGA side, Steve Bannon and more than 60 conservative figures had signed an open letter urging Trump to ship the order, and a Future of Life Institute poll found that 79% of Republican voters supported government testing of frontier AI models before release.

What happens next is unclear. The White House Office of the National Cyber Director said it is developing additional AI security initiatives outside the executive-order track, while Chief of Staff Susie Wiles publicly slapped down a separate FDA-style licensing proposal from National Economic Council Director Kevin Hassett, posting that the president was not "in the business of picking winners and losers." For the frontier labs, the practical effect is that the United States has now spent two consecutive administrations announcing — and then walking back — pre-release safety review regimes, leaving voluntary commitments from Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google DeepMind as the only operative U.S. safety floor.

Want AI news before everyone else?

The morning's most important AI stories, straight to your inbox. No fluff.

Related Articles

417–3 in the House. One objection in the Senate. Editorial illustration of the stalled Ratepayer Protection Act, H.R. 9340. A large 417–3 House vote meets a single red senator and a closed stop line. Below, AI data centres drawing 100 MW or more connect through a transmission tower to a home and an electricity bill. Amber conduits link the industrial load, grid upgrades and household costs. The proposed large-load standard would assign full incremental grid-upgrade costs to data centres, but a senator blocked unanimous consent, objecting that states were only asked to consider the standard. H.R. 9340 RATEPAYER PROTECTION ACT 417–3 HOUSE VOTE ONE SENATOR. BILL BLOCKED. The objection: states only asked to “consider”. AI DATA CENTRES 100 MW+ GRID UPGRADES WHO PAYS? BILL $ HOUSEHOLD BILLS BITSMINDS.COM
Industry

House Votes 417–3 to Make Data Centers Pay for the Grid

Hacktron: from an image upload to an internal repository An oversized HEIC photo file is connected by an electric green line to two glass security gates, labelled Forum and SSO, then to a dark repository cabinet bearing the OpenAI emblem and a pull-request symbol. A separate Claude Opus 5 plaque credits the model used by the researchers. The top caption says disclosed and patched. This is a conceptual illustration of Hacktron's reported security research and vulnerability chain. The two gates represent the two reported flaws, and their open padlocks are a visual metaphor. Original vector editorial illustration for BitsMinds, hacktron-claude-opus-5-openai-exploit-chain. 18 September 2026. Conceptual architecture based on the article, not a real interface or technical system diagram. HACKTRON / SECURITY RESEARCH DISCLOSED & PATCHED .HEIC IMAGE UPLOAD 01 FORUM IMAGE PROCESSING 02 SSO SIGN-IN TRUST INTERNAL REPO PULL REQUEST OPENED CLAUDE OPUS 5 RESEARCH ASSISTANT TWO FLAWS. ONE CHAIN. BITSMINDS.COM
Industry

Claude Opus 5 Wrote the Exploit That Broke Into OpenAI

Pew's global AI survey: uncertainty about the future of work An empty ochre office chair faces a computer in a quiet evening office. Beyond the window, buildings of unequal heights suggest an uneven economy. A large globe on the left is surrounded by 37 separate markers: 34 amber and three neutral. They represent surveyed publics, not individual respondents, countries mapped to locations, job counts or measured job losses. The caption states that in 34 of 37 publics, more people expect job losses than gains. This is an editorial illustration of public expectations reported in the Pew survey, not a prediction of what AI will actually do. Original vector illustration for BitsMinds, pew-global-ai-survey-2026-jobs-inequality. 17 September 2026. Survey finding, not observed labour-market outcomes. PEW / GLOBAL AI SURVEY 34 / 37 PUBLICS More expect job losses than gains AI BITSMINDS.COM
Industry

Most of the World Expects AI to Cost Jobs, Pew Finds