Global affairs chief Chris Lehane wants to tone down the debate over AI's societal impacts--and get states to pass laws that won't derail OpenAI's meteoric rise. Three months ago, OpenAI cofounder Greg Brockman told me his concerns about a mounting public relations crisis facing artificial intelligence companies: Despite the popularity of tools like ChatGPT, an increasingly large share of the population said they viewed AI negatively. Since then, the backlash has only intensified. College commencement speakers are now getting booed for talking about AI in optimistic terms. Last month, someone threw a Molotov cocktail at OpenAI CEO Sam Altman's San Francisco home and wrote a manifesto advocating for crimes against AI executives.

OpenAI's President Gave Millions to Trump. He Says It's for Humanity In an interview with WIRED, Greg Brockman says his political donations support OpenAI's mission--even if some employees at the company disagree. OpenAI's president and cofounder Greg Brockman doesn't consider himself political, which is surprising, because he was one of President Trump's biggest individual donors of 2025. Greg and his wife, Anna Brockman, gave $25 million to MAGA Inc--a super PAC that supports President Trump--in September of last year. The pair also gave $25 million to a bipartisan AI super PAC, Leading the Future, which says it plans to oppose politicians that jeopardize Americans' "ability to benefit from AI."

In 2026, states will go head to head with the White House's sweeping executive order. In the final weeks of 2025, the battle over regulating artificial intelligence in the US reached a boiling point. On December 11, after Congress failed twice to pass a law banning state AI laws, President Donald Trump signed a sweeping executive order seeking to handcuff states from regulating the booming industry. Instead, he vowed to work with Congress to establish a "minimally burdensome" national AI policy, one that would position the US to win the global AI race. The move marked a qualified victory for tech titans, who have been marshaling multimillion-dollar war chests to oppose AI regulations, arguing that a patchwork of state laws would stifle innovation. In 2026, the battleground will shift to the courts.

Silicon Valley's battle against AI regulation is already shaping the next US election cycle. Silicon Valley is already pouring tens of millions of dollars into the midterm elections taking place across the US in 2026, as the tech industry's war over AI regulation moves decisively into American politics. Technology executives, investors, and companies tied to the AI boom are funding a new network of AI-focused super PACS, which is poised to make AI a major issue in this year's state and federal elections races. The election spending marks a sharp escalation of the AI regulation debate that has divided Silicon Valley for years. In the absence of federal action, state lawmakers in New York, California, and Colorado have passed laws in the past year requiring large AI developers to disclose safety practices and assess risks such as algorithmic discrimination.

A little over two years ago, OpenAI's founder Sam Altman stood in front of lawmakers at a congressional hearing and asked them for stronger regulations on artificial intelligence. The technology was "risky" and "could cause significant harm to the world", Altman said, calling for the creation of a new regulatory agency to address AI safety. Altman and the AI industry are promoting a very different message today. The AI they once framed as an existential threat to humanity is now key to maintaining American prosperity and hegemony. Regulations that were once a necessity are now criticized as a hindrance that will weaken the US and embolden its adversaries.

On the evening of January 6, 2021, Brad Parscale texted Donald Trump adviser Katrina Pierson about the insurrectionist assault on the US Capitol that had finally been quashed by police. "This is about [T]rump pushing for uncertainty in our country," wrote Parscale, who ran digital and data operations for Trump's 2016 campaign and managed his 2020 reelection effort before being replaced. This week I feel guilty for helping him win." "You did what you felt right at the time and therefore it was right," Pierson replied. "Yeah," Parscale answered, "but a woman is dead." The conversation continued, with Pierson texting, "You do realize this was going to happen." Parscale responded that Trump's rhetoric had "killed someone." Pierson countered, "It wasn't the rhetoric." Parscale was obviously blaming Trump for the storming of the Capitol and the death of Trump supporter Ashli Babbitt. In these private texts--which were not made public until mid-2022 during the House investigation of January ...

The company decided to close its doors because it was losing clients and facing mounting legal fees in the Facebook investigation, according to people familiar with the matter. SCL Group and SCL Elections, which are affiliated with Cambridge Analytica, also are shutting down in the U.S. and the U.K. Cambridge Analytica and SCL Elections issued a joint statement on Wednesday confirming the companies' closures. "Over the past several months, Cambridge Analytica has been the subject of numerous unfounded accusations," the statement said. "The siege of media coverage has driven away virtually all of the company's customers and suppliers. As a result, it has been determined that it is no longer viable to continue operating the business."