President Donald Trump told the 81st session of the United Nations General Assembly on Sept. 22, 2026, that the United States "totally rejects any attempt to construct a globalist scheme of control" for artificial intelligence, which he said would hereinafter be officially called "Super Intelligence," according to a White House release summarizing the address. With the speech, Trump used the U.N. stage to reject international frameworks for controlling AI and to rename the technology in U.S. documents.
Trump did not call for scrapping oversight altogether. While saying "we have to be careful," he said the United States is "going to encourage it, not rein it in." He added that he would not "stifle growth of something that will be bigger than the industrial revolution." The same address paired the growth line with a Justice Department watch: law-enforcement bodies "will rein things in if we have to," even as "we will only encourage super intelligence" and "watch it closely through the Department of Justice."
In the United Nations' own account of the speech, Trump argued that AI should be called superintelligence because "artificial" makes intelligence sound fake, and declared "Whoever wins superintelligence wins," while saying the United States would encourage development and monitor potential risks. The word superintelligence usually means AI much smarter than people; Trump used it as a new name for AI in general. The White House release is a selection of highlights, not a full transcript of the speech.
According to a news report, leaders of more than 20 mostly European countries had urged binding safety measures for advanced AI ahead of the assembly, and AI powers China and the United States did not endorse that idea. Trump announced the renaming of AI in U.S. documents from the podium; it is not yet clear whether it will appear in an executive order or agency guidance.
U.S. agencies have not said how they will carry out the rename, or how the Justice Department's watch over AI will work in practice. Nor is it clear whether European talks on binding safety rules can advance without U.S. support, or how other governments will answer the "whoever wins" framing. Until official documents follow, the speech pairs encouragement of AI's growth with law enforcement held in reserve; it is not proof that U.S. oversight of AI has been abolished.