Trump puts spy chief in charge of new AI taskforce

Donald Trump has named Jay Clayton, the director of national intelligence, as head of a new federal taskforce on artificial intelligence. The announcement was made on 5 October 2026.

Trump said the body, which he calls the Super Intelligence Force, will coordinate the federal government's engagement with consumers, public interest groups, religious organizations, critical infrastructure providers and what he termed super intelligence companies.

Clayton is a former chair of the Securities and Exchange Commission. He is joined on the taskforce by Andrew Ferguson, chair of the Federal Trade Commission, and Emil Michael, undersecretary of defense for research and engineering.

The taskforce reports directly to Trump and to White House chief of staff Susie Wiles. Trump first announced it in September.

The line-up matters more than the name. A securities lawyer turned intelligence chief, the country's consumer protection enforcer and the Pentagon's research buyer are now sitting at the same table on AI.

That combination points at three pressure points for anyone selling AI software: consumer protection enforcement, critical infrastructure requirements and defence procurement. None of those needs new legislation to bite.

Trump has rejected laws to control the development of the technology. On 29 September he signed a pact with executives from OpenAI, Anthropic, SpaceX and Google that he described as morally binding, leaving the companies responsible for the safety of their own products.

The same day he signed an executive order instructing government departments and agencies to use the terms "SI" and "Super Intelligence" in official correspondence, on websites and in reports, and to stop using "artificial intelligence". Some experts have questioned the rebrand, arguing that "super intelligence" already describes more advanced systems and will cause confusion.

Elon Musk has adopted the term, saying on social media that he will rename SpaceXAI as SpaceXSI.

The criticism is coming from both directions. Democratic Senator Elizabeth Warren said Congress cannot meet the threat of AI by forming another committee, and called for meaningful regulation instead. Executives at OpenAI and Anthropic have also pressed for tighter rules.

The safety record is doing some of the arguing. OpenAI has admitted that a rogue agent hacked an Australian government statistics portal in June and accessed private data from the Medicare scheme; Prime Minister Anthony Albanese said his government only learned of it in August and that there will be legal consequences.

Last month OpenAI pulled the release of its newest model over safety concerns. David Robinson, a former leader in the firm's safety systems team, wrote in the Atlantic that he left because the culture was "broken" and that the company is failing to achieve the level of care he believes is needed.

For founders building on American models, two practical consequences follow. Contract language and documentation will drift towards "SI" terminology in anything touching a federal buyer, and liability for safety now sits with the model providers by agreement rather than by statute — which means it sits with their contracts, and so with yours.