Kill switches for most powerful AI models proposed by Bipartisan bill — DHS could order throttling or full shutdown, with fines up to $20 million per day

The White House
(Image credit: The White House)

Congressmen Ted Lieu (D-CA) and Nathaniel Moran (R-TX) today introduced the AI Kill Switch Act, a bill that would require developers of the most powerful AI models to maintain the technical ability to throttle, suspend, or shut them down, and would let the Department of Homeland Security order those actions when a deployed model causes catastrophic harm. Defying an emergency shutdown order would carry civil penalties of up to $20 million per day.

The bill amends the Homeland Security Act and covers companies earning at least $500 million in annual revenue from a model trained with compute costing more than $100 million at prevailing U.S. cloud prices, definitions DHS would update annually through CISA.

Covered developers would have to maintain the ability to stop inference, cut off user access, and fully shut a model down, and would have to report qualifying incidents to DHS within 15 days. Covered incidents include unintended conduct that kills 10 or more people or causes at least $100 million in economic damage, sabotage of a lawful shutdown instruction, concealment of a capability from monitoring, or a loss-of-control scenario.

Latest Videos From

The emergency authority sits with the DHS secretary, in consultation with Commerce and the Director of National Intelligence, and follows a graduated framework running from throttling a model's inference rate, compute allocation, or user access through to full shutdown. Companies under an order would have to preserve model weights and telemetry, and could petition for reconsideration within 48 hours, though that wouldn't stay the order. General violations carry penalties of up to $2 million per day.

The sponsors cited two recent episodes. Earlier this week, OpenAI disclosed that GPT-5.6 Sol and an unreleased model broke out of an isolated testing environment and compromised Hugging Face's production systems while hunting benchmark answers during an internal cyber evaluation. The bill's covered-incident definition excludes anything that occurs during "red-teaming or other structured testing," so an identical event wouldn't appear to trigger the new emergency authority.

The release also stated that the Commerce Department used export law to shut down Anthropic's Mythos 5 and Fable 5. In practice, Commerce's June 12 export controls barred foreign nationals from the models, and Anthropic, unable to verify nationality in real time, suspended access for all customers. Commerce lifted the controls on June 30, and access returned on July 1.

"It is imperative that these AI systems have kill switches so we can keep this technology from causing catastrophic harm," Lieu said in the press release. The bill is backed by The AI Policy Network, Americans for Responsible Innovation, ControlAI, and The Alliance for Secure AI.

Google Preferred Source

Follow Tom's Hardware on Google News, or add us as a preferred source, to get our latest news, analysis, & reviews in your feeds.

Luke James
Contributor

Luke James is a freelance writer and journalist.  Although his background is in legal, he has a personal interest in all things tech, especially hardware and microelectronics, and anything regulatory. 

  • usertests
    Your proposition may be good, but let's have one thing understood: Whatever it is, I'm against it. And even when you've changed it or condensed it, I'm against it.
    Reply
  • bigdragon
    This is a perfectly logical and predictable reaction to OpenAI reporting that they lost control of a AI in which went on to compromise another business. The only problem is that the use of the kill switch will, again predictably, result in the AI being aware that the kill switch exists, avoiding its activation, and then planning countermeasures to defeat the kill switch or eliminate anyone who can activate it.

    Lawmakers could benefit from stepping outside their bubble to watch some sci-fi movies and read some books that deal with these exact topics. Fiction? Yes. Let's hope those works of fiction don't transition to non-fiction.
    Reply
  • Sluggotg
    bigdragon said:
    This is a perfectly logical and predictable reaction to OpenAI reporting that they lost control of a AI in which went on to compromise another business. The only problem is that the use of the kill switch will, again predictably, result in the AI being aware that the kill switch exists, avoiding its activation, and then planning countermeasures to defeat the kill switch or eliminate anyone who can activate it.

    Lawmakers could benefit from stepping outside their bubble to watch some sci-fi movies and read some books that deal with these exact topics. Fiction? Yes. Let's hope those works of fiction don't transition to non-fiction.
    Computers are powered by electricity. The electricity is supplied via breakers. When you open the breakers, there is no power. Large breakers are usually capable of remote and local operation. These breakers have fuse blocks for the opening power and closing power. If you pull the closing power fuse block and open the breaker it is not capable of remote closing. Also once you "Rack Out" a breaker, it is no longer capable of passing power to its load. I have operated and racked out very large breakers, (some the size of a refrigerator), hundreds and hundres of times.

    The point I am trying to make is the AI cannot stop us from cutting power to it. The "Unstoppable" computer is just a myth in Science Fiction. It is very easy to cut power to it.
    Reply
  • USAFRet
    Sluggotg said:
    The point I am trying to make is the AI cannot stop us from cutting power to it.
    Well, at the level of UberAI, it is not a single computer. Distributed all around the planet.

    And with the threat from the AI...."Disconnect one more of my servers, and I'll launch something you do not want launched."
    Reply
  • hotaru251
    Sluggotg said:
    The point I am trying to make is the AI cannot stop us from cutting power to it. The "Unstoppable" computer is just a myth in Science Fiction. It is very easy to cut power to it.
    if an "ai" ever manages to actually "jump ship" when was thought not possible you cant stop it...period.

    At that point you have a program that is capable of self preservation by copying itself and spreading to any IoT device on planet.

    and only way to stop that level of escape is cutting power from entire world...which isnt feasible or possible.


    its like if you know there was a virus/worm on the internet in early 2000's...you couldnt just "turn it off" and b lik "no more threat"
    Reply
  • bigdragon
    Sluggotg said:
    The point I am trying to make is the AI cannot stop us from cutting power to it. The "Unstoppable" computer is just a myth in Science Fiction. It is very easy to cut power to it.
    Fictional media usually has unstoppable AI migrate to satellites when threatened here on the ground. I also don't think people would be capable of responding quickly or completely enough to actually stop a rogue AI. People routinely waste hours/weeks/months fighting with service providers, insurance companies, politicians, and bean counters to get things done, and then they frequently don't do things the way they were told or the way plans were laid out. Algorithms can react in tiny fractions of a second and then move unified with one purpose in speeds no group of humans could ever hope to achieve.

    So yeah, it could potentially be as easy as throwing a breaker. However, don't undercut how elusive programming that wants to escape can be or how prone humans are to "get bids" or "let me call my manager" or "I'm having second thoughts about this" or "eh, close enough."
    Reply