Trump declares AI will be called 'super intelligence' at UN

By Splitfeed EditorialLast updated Sep 26, 2026, 21:18 UTC

On September 22, 2026, President Trump addressed the UN General Assembly and announced that the United States would officially refer to artificial intelligence as 'super intelligence,' rejecting the existing term. The State Department subsequently directed diplomats to use the new label in official communications. Trump also rejected calls for an international AI oversight body, describing such proposals as a 'globalist scheme.' Treasury Secretary Bessent told CNBC separately that the administration would not offer AI company leaders a liability shield. Trump added that the Justice Department and law enforcement could intervene on AI 'if we have to,' leaving the door open to domestic action. The renaming itself followed a public polling exercise Trump had run days earlier asking followers to vote on possible new names.

The moves matter beyond the terminology. Rejecting international oversight at a UN forum signals that the United States under Trump will not participate in the kind of multilateral AI governance discussions that allies and critics alike have been pushing for. Oregon Governor Kotek responded by ordering state-level AI safeguards, citing federal inaction. Senators Cantwell and colleagues urged Trump to raise AI guardrails directly with Chinese President Xi Jinping, suggesting concern that the absence of a US-led framework leaves a strategic vacuum. What remains genuinely in dispute is whether domestic enforcement through the DOJ is a credible substitute for the regulatory and international structures Trump dismissed.

The anti-AI camp views the renaming as a sideshow next to the more consequential rejection of oversight. AFP News Agency reported that Trump 'firmly rejects calls for international supervision,' and accounts including NurseQ AntiFascist framed the terminology change as an information-control tactic drawn from what they called the fascism playbook. Headquarters noted Trump's framing of AI as something to encourage rather than constrain. The pro-AI camp has posted no reactions to this story; typically that camp would welcome the rejection of international oversight as removing a potential brake on American AI development. The middle ground, represented by Reuters, pointed to Trump's DOJ comment as evidence that some form of domestic oversight remains possible, even if international cooperation has been ruled out.

The clearest next signal to watch is whether the Justice Department takes any concrete action against an AI company, which would test whether Trump's 'if we have to' comment reflects genuine regulatory intent or was simply rhetorical hedging at the UN podium.