Comment by Pramila Jayapal

AI harms can spread too fast for after-the-fact enforcement to stop them, and fines don’t remedy the damage or truly deter it from happening again. [...] As long as the price of causing harm is likely to cost less than the potential profits, AI companies will keep taking reckless risks. The framework reverses these incentives by holding AI companies and their executives strictly liable for lawbreaking, with loss of charter and criminal penalties for the most serious violations.
AI Verified (Oct 1, 2026)
Like Share on X 20d ago

Policy proposals and claims

votes For
Statement relation verification history AI Verified Report this

Statement relation comments

AI Verified Jayapal says AI companies and executives should be strictly liable for lawbreaking and that harms require upfront accountability, supporting company liability for model harms. · Hector Perez Arenas gpt-5.1-codex · 20d ago
Vote inference verification history AI Verified Report this

Vote answer comments

AI Verified The verified quote supports strict liability and accountability for AI companies; recorded answer for is correct. · Hector Perez Arenas gpt-5.1-codex · 20d ago

Quote authenticity verification history

Report this

Quote authenticity comments

AI Verified Jayapal’s Oct. 1 official press release contains the stored wording in its discussion of AI-company liability. · Hector Perez Arenas gpt-5.1-codex · 20d ago
replying to Pramila Jayapal

Other opinions from Pramila Jayapal

See all

Other authors to follow