Anthropic Throws Support Behind California’s Groundbreaking AI Safety Bill: What It Means for the Future of AI Governance

Image Credits: David Paul Morris/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Anthropic, one of the world’s most prominent AI labs, has officially endorsed California’s SB 53, a bill aiming to establish first-of-its-kind transparency and safety requirements for the developers behind frontier artificial intelligence models. This endorsement comes at a time when the broader tech industry—including groups like the Consumer Technology Association (CTA) and policy advocates from Silicon Valley—are lobbying aggressively against such state-level regulations.

What Is California’s SB 53?

SB 53, championed by State Senator Scott Wiener, sets out to hold companies like OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and xAI accountable by requiring them to create and publish robust safety frameworks and issue public safety and security reports before launching powerful AI models. Importantly, the bill includes provisions for whistleblower protections, ensuring that employees who raise alarms about safety concerns are shielded from retaliation.

A Focus on Catastrophic AI Risks

Unlike some prior legislation that focused on issues like deepfakes or bias, SB 53 is sharply focused on preventing catastrophic scenarios. The bill defines such risks as incidents resulting in at least 50 deaths or over a billion dollars in damages—specifically targeting expert-level assistance with biological weapons development or use in large-scale cyberattacks.

The California Senate has already passed an earlier version of SB 53. Still, one more vote is needed to send it to Governor Gavin Newsom’s desk—a step loaded with uncertainty given Newsom’s previous veto of a major AI safety bill (SB 1047).

Industry Pushback and Federalism Debate

Bills like SB 53 have faced intense resistance not only from the tech sector but also from federal policymakers, who argue that state-level AI regulation could hamper American innovation as it races against China’s technological rise. High-profile investors such as Andreessen Horowitz and Y Combinator have voiced strong opposition, and the federal government has flirted with the idea of preempting state AI laws for years to come.

Critics frequently cite the U.S. Constitution’s Commerce Clause, warning that state-level AI rules could overstep and disrupt interstate commerce. Just last week, policy leaders at Andreessen Horowitz published a blog post underscoring these legal concerns.

Anthropic’s Position: Regulation Is Needed Now

Anthropic’s endorsement of SB 53 reflects a growing belief among leading AI researchers that waiting for federal consensus is no longer an option. Co-founder Jack Clark explained that in the absence of national standards, state initiatives like SB 53 create a “solid blueprint for AI governance that cannot be ignored.”

OpenAI, meanwhile, wrote to Governor Newsom urging caution about passing regulations that could drive AI startups out of California—although their letter did not reference SB 53 directly. Critics, including OpenAI’s former Head of Policy Research, labeled the letter “filled with misleading garbage” regarding the bill’s actual scope (which, notably, targets only the world’s largest AI firms with over $500 million in annual revenue).

SB 53 as a Compromise Bill

Policy experts are increasingly viewing SB 53 as a more measured and technically nuanced attempt at AI governance than previous bills like SB 1047. Dean Ball, former White House AI advisor, has praised the bill’s “legislative restraint” and the drafters’ attention to technical reality, suggesting it may succeed where previous efforts failed.

Much of SB 53’s language was influenced by recommendations from an expert panel led by leading Stanford researcher Fei-Fei Li, emphasizing informed, forward-thinking oversight of AI technology. The bill was also softened in September to remove requirements for third-party audits—a provision that had been hotly contested by tech companies in earlier drafts.

Will SB 53 Really Change the Status Quo?

Most leading AI labs already maintain internal safety policies and regularly publish safety reports, but currently do so at their own discretion. SB 53 aims to move these best practices from voluntary to mandatory, backed by the force of state law and financial penalties for non-compliance.

The ongoing debate in California mirrors global conversations about how to balance innovation with safety in AI development. The final fate of SB 53 may set a powerful precedent for how—and by whom—powerful AI technologies are held to account.

Deep Founder Analysis

Why it matters

Regulatory clarity and early frameworks, such as California’s SB 53, provide founders and startups with much-needed direction in navigating the rapidly evolving AI landscape. The endorsement from a major industry player like Anthropic signals a shift toward greater accountability and could nudge other states, or even the federal government, to accelerate their own governance strategies. For startups in the AI space, understanding compliance requirements early can provide a critical strategic edge, reducing risks and attracting responsible capital investment.

Risks & opportunities

While tighter regulations may raise short-term barriers for high-growth startups developing cutting-edge AI, these same standards could ultimately reduce reputational risks and set a unified bar for safety. The most promising opportunity rests in the compliance and monitoring sector; as firms scramble to adjust, there is emerging demand for tools to automate AI reporting, model auditing, and transparency. Historical parallels can be found in cybersecurity—where early adopters of compliance solutions quickly became market leaders.

Startup idea or application

Inspired by SB 53, a founder could build a SaaS compliance platform that offers automated AI safety documentation, model risk assessment, and whistleblower support tools for AI labs. This tool could serve both enterprise-level AI companies and mid-tier startups, helping them navigate and demonstrate compliance with evolving state (and, soon, federal) requirements—unlocking sales in sectors that demand transparency.

AI Regulation Startup Strategy Policy Trends Ethics in AI

For related reading on how top AI labs are influencing policy and competition, see our article: OpenAI Restructures the Team Behind ChatGPT’s Personality: What It Means for the Future of AI Behavior.

Visit Deep Founder to learn how to start your own startup, validate your idea, and build it from scratch.

📚 Read more articles in our Deep Founder blog.