Public paper · October 3, 2026 · General desk
SI or AI? Federal ‘Super Intelligence’ Order Meets California’s AI Naming Rule
A plain-language brief on Executive Order 14434, which tells the federal executive branch to say “Super Intelligence” and “SI,” and on California’s order that state agencies keep saying “artificial intelligence” and “AI.”
noticenearby.com/papers/si-ai-naming-fight-oct-2026.pdf
In late September 2026, the federal government and the State of California picked different names for the same technology. The federal executive branch was told to say “Super Intelligence,” or “SI.” California state agencies were told to keep saying “artificial intelligence,” or “AI.”
This is a short public brief. It says what each order does, and what it does not do. It does not pick a winner. It does not say which name is better. The federal facts come from the order printed in the Federal Register. The California facts come from news reports of the governor’s order and of worker laws he signed the same day.
What the federal order says
President Donald J. Trump signed Executive Order 14434 on September 29, 2026. The title is “Inaugurating the Era of Super Intelligence.” The Federal Register published it on October 2, 2026. The document number is 2026-20321. The citation is 91 FR 63129.
The policy is written in plain terms. To the maximum extent permitted by law, the executive branch uses “Super Intelligence” and “SI” in place of “Artificial Intelligence” and “AI.” The switch covers official correspondence, public communications, websites, reports, policy documents, and other non-statutory documents. In those settings, the order says the executive branch will not acknowledge use of the older terms.
“Non-statutory” is the key limit. A statute is a law passed by Congress. This order tells agencies how to write their own papers and pages. It does not, by itself, rewrite a statute that already says “artificial intelligence.”
The order also leaves old paperwork alone. It does not require anyone to change previously issued regulations, Presidential actions, contracts, grants, or other historical documents. A contract from last year can still say “AI.” A rule already in print can still say “artificial intelligence.”
The definition points to a law that already exists. For this order, unless the law says otherwise, “Super Intelligence” and “SI” mean the technologies and systems covered by “artificial intelligence” as defined in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3). That definition governs the order unless a later presidential action, consistent with law, or an Act of Congress, replaces it.
Within 60 days of the date of the order, the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology, called the APST, must send the President proposed legislative language for a federal definition of “Super Intelligence” and “SI.” A proposal is a draft. It is not a new statute on the day it is written.
The order is here: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2026/10/02/2026-20321/inaugurating-the-era-of-super-intelligence
What California told its agencies
On September 30, 2026, Governor Gavin Newsom issued an executive order for California. It tells California state agencies to keep calling the technology “artificial intelligence” or “AI,” not “super intelligence.”
POLITICO reported that order the same day: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/09/30/war-of-words-newsom-orders-california-to-say-ai-after-trumps-superintelligence-decree-01102898
The Guardian carried an Associated Press report the same day: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/sep/30/gavin-newsom-california-ai-threat
In a statement reported by POLITICO, Newsom said the order was “informed by common sense.” He also said, “Super intelligence is clearly not coming from the White House — that’s why California continues to lead.” That sentence is his comment on the rename. The instruction for agencies is narrower. California keeps the words “artificial intelligence” and “AI” for state agencies, even if new federal non-statutory papers switch to “Super Intelligence” and “SI.”
The same day, the governor signed worker-protection laws. The Associated Press report in the Guardian describes three limits. The laws ban employers from relying on AI alone to decide to fire someone. They require written notice to workers if AI is responsible for mass layoffs. They ban using the technology to predict a worker’s emotional state from biometric data. This brief does not add bill numbers or other workplace rules.
The Associated Press also reported two lines from Newsom’s statement on those laws: “AI should expand opportunity – not come at the expense of workers and families,” and “As this technology reshapes the workplace, California is putting people at the center.” The same report said he criticized the lack of broad federal rules for the technology. A new name, by itself, does not set those workplace limits. The naming orders choose words. The worker laws set rules for how the technology is used at work in California.
What a reader should take from both orders
If you open a new federal website, report, or public note from the executive branch, you may see “Super Intelligence” or “SI” where you used to see “AI.” That is what Executive Order 14434 calls for, to the maximum extent the law allows.
If you open a California state agency page, you should still see “artificial intelligence” or “AI.” The state order tells those agencies not to switch.
Old federal regulations, old presidential actions, old contracts, and old grants do not have to be rewritten because of the new order.
The statute named in the federal order, 15 U.S.C. 9401(3), still uses the term “artificial intelligence.” The order borrows that definition for “Super Intelligence” and “SI.” Changing the statute itself would take an act of Congress, or another step the law allows. The 60-day job is to propose language, not to enact it.
Neither order, as described here, changes what the technology is. Each one changes which name officials use in the documents that government controls.
A short checklist
- Federal executive branch, new non-statutory writing: “Super Intelligence” and “SI,” under Executive Order 14434.
- Signed: September 29, 2026. Printed in the Federal Register: October 2, 2026. Citation: 91 FR 63129. Document number: 2026-20321.
- Old regulations, presidential actions, contracts, grants, and other historical documents: not required to be changed.
- Meaning, unless the law says otherwise: the technologies and systems in the “artificial intelligence” definition at 15 U.S.C. 9401(3).
- Within 60 days of the order: the APST proposes legislative language for a federal definition.
- California state agencies: keep “artificial intelligence” and “AI.”
- California worker laws signed the same day: no firing decision based on AI alone; written notice if AI is responsible for mass layoffs; no predicting a worker’s emotional state from biometric data.
This is a public brief, not legal advice. If a form, a contract, or a statute uses one name, follow that document. Do not swap the words on your own because a news story used the other name.
Notes and sources
- Federal facts from Executive Order 14434, Federal Register document 2026-20321, 91 FR 63129, published October 2, 2026. California facts from POLITICO and Associated Press reports of the September 30, 2026 governor order and the worker laws signed the same day.
- This is a public brief, not legal advice. If a form, a contract, or a statute uses one name, follow that document.
- Author: Ryan Standley / Record of Sale, LLC / Notice Nearby.
- Discussed on @NoticeNearYou: https://x.com/NoticeNearYou/status/2106389589124387242
- Not legal advice. Not a newspaper. Not Legal Publication. Record of Sale, LLC (Oregon).
General desk · Notice Nearby public papers shelf. @NoticeNearYou post pending.
Not legal advice. Not a newspaper. Not Legal Publication. Record of Sale, LLC (Oregon).