Trump adviser rules out centralized AI regulator
Former White House adviser Sriram Krishnan ruled out creating a centralized AI licensing body, favoring voluntary frameworks and industry self-policing to maintain U.S. innovation. He attributed data center opposition to poor industry messaging and supported export controls on Anthropic's model.

*this image is generated using AI for illustrative purposes only.
Former Senior White House Policy Advisor on Artificial Intelligence Sriram Krishnan stated that the White House will not establish a centralized AI licensing body similar to the Food and Drug Administration. Krishnan emphasized that the administration opposes burdensome, bureaucratic red tape and is not interested in picking winners and losers in the technology sector. He asserted that creating a centralized agency to license AI models would put "sand in the gears" of the industry, requiring legal intervention before model releases. "That is never, never going to happen under President Trump," Krishnan told the Financial Times.
Industry Backlash and Messaging
Krishnan attributed the growing backlash against artificial intelligence to the industry's own messaging rather than government policy. He noted that AI labs have done a "terrible job" explaining the benefits of the technology, arguing that their focus on dystopian narratives, including job losses and existential risks, has created public wariness. This sentiment follows local opposition to at least 75 U.S. data center projects worth approximately $130 billion in the first three months of 2026. Billionaire investor Mark Cuban echoed this view, suggesting that resistance to data centers serves as a proxy for broader concerns regarding wealth concentration associated with AI.
Regulatory Approach and Oversight
Instead of formal regulation, Krishnan pointed to a recent executive order establishing a voluntary framework that grants the government 30 days to review a model prior to release. For the long term, he advocates for shifting oversight to an industry-run "clearinghouse" that collaborates with intelligence and defense officials. He warned that delaying AI tools for weeks would likely harm American innovation and argued that excessive regulation could allow Chinese companies to overtake U.S. AI labs.
| Policy Area | Administration Stance |
|---|---|
| AI Licensing Body | Will not create centralized regulator |
| Regulatory Style | Opposes burdensome red tape |
| Oversight Model | Favors industry-run clearinghouse |
| Innovation Risk | Excessive rules aid Chinese competitors |
Export Controls and Leadership
Krishnan also addressed the use of export controls to pause Anthropic's Mythos model after Amazon flagged a security flaw. He supported the decision, taken "very, very reluctantly," and denied it targeted Anthropic due to its dispute with the Pentagon. These comments align with previous assertions that the United States must maintain leadership in cryptocurrency and artificial intelligence to secure economic and national security interests. Krishnan's departure from the White House follows the exit of AI czar David Sacks from his formal role, signaling a shift in Silicon Valley's direct presence within the administration.
How will the proposed industry-run 'clearinghouse' enforce compliance without the legal authority of a centralized regulatory body?
What specific strategies will the administration employ to counter the public backlash against data centers given the opposition to $130 billion in projects?
Could the reliance on voluntary frameworks and voluntary reviews create a regulatory gap that exposes users to safety risks?






























