So the stupid people will get more stupid by listening to stupid shit...

Texas is poised to require millions of students to study Bible stories

By Elizabeth Wolfe

Texas is on the verge of requiring its more than 5 million public school students to study Bible stories, as the state emerges as a leader in a national conservative effort to infuse Christian teachings into American classrooms.

The majority-Republican Texas State Board of Education is expected to vote Friday to approve a proposal that would establish biblical stories and Bible verses – among other works – as required reading for its K-12 English and literature curriculum.

Going beyond a 2023 law that required at least one Texas State Board of Education approved literary work be taught in each grade level, the new proposal would require multiple titles for each grade, and that each one be read “in its entirety.”

Required literature lists in general, two experts told The Associated Press, may be a first for any state.

Many Texas students are already familiar with at least some Christian teachings: The state last year became the largest state to require classrooms to display the Ten Commandments, a law recently upheld in federal court.

The new list of required titles would include a picture-book adaptation of the David and Goliath story for elementary students and Bible passages about Adam and Eve for older students, among other references, according to a proposed list online.

At the same meeting, the school board will take up a vote to rewrite the state’s social studies curriculum, focusing more on Texas and US history and deemphasizing some teachings about global history and cultures. The change would eliminate a sixth grade “World Cultures” course and significantly expand lessons on communism.

The proposals, which would go into effect in 2030, have sharply divided teachers, parents and community members — hundreds of whom appeared before the school board this week to voice their concern and enthusiasm.

Supporters argue the Bible should be studied as an essential literary text that can help students understand Western history and the founding of the US. One policy group has celebrated it as the “final battle” in an effort to purge Texas schools of lessons on race and history that they say divides students and criticizes America’s founders.

However, those who oppose the changes say the mandatory reading list favors Christianity over other religions and violates the constitutionally protected separation between church and state. The teachings may also infringe on parents’ ability to lead their children’s religious education, they say, particularly in non-Christian households.

From Sunday school to public school

In recent years, Texas leaders have broadly eliminated studies of racial and cultural diversity while expanding the schools’ abilities to introduce Christianity to students.

In 2023, the state became the first to allow chaplains to counsel students, and the following year approved a measure that offered more funding to schools that teach an optional Bible-infused elementary school curriculum. The state’s education code already requires K-12 schools to teach “religious literature, including the Hebrew Scriptures (Old Testament) and New Testament, and its impact on history and literature.”

As students learn US history, supporters of the proposed curriculum argue Christian texts should be inseparable from lessons on the nation’s founding.

“We don’t have to incorporate every religious belief in our history or in our literary works, because our nation was founded on Judeo-Christian values,” said Susan Perez, founder of a Christian parent advocacy group, Citizens for Education Reform, in a school board meeting Monday.

Perez pointed out Christian references in the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution, which was signed in “the Year of Our Lord” 1787.

If passed, third-grade students would read the story, “ROAR! – Daniel and the Lion’s Den,” alongside titles like “Stuart Little” and “Charlotte’s Web,” according to the proposed lists online.

As students become more advanced in reading level, they would be introduced to passages directly from the Bible. Sixth-grade students would learn “The Shepherd’s Psalm” from the Book of Psalms alongside religious writings from George Washington and poems by Langston Hughes and Robert Frost.

Several community members have expressed concerns the plan would infringe on their autonomy as parents to oversee their children’s religious education.

Kimmie Fink, the mother of an active-duty military family stationed in Texas, told the board, “I would like to believe that my children’s constitutionally guaranteed religious freedom rights will remain intact wherever we are stationed.”

“Is this not the case in Texas, a state that champions parents’ rights? In Texas, parents have the fundamental legal right to direct the moral and religious upbringing of their children without state interference. The proposed literary works trample on this right,” Fink added.

Some proponents of the curriculum changes dispute arguments that children will be explicitly taught religion, saying the Biblical passages and stories will be taught in the context of world history.

“They are being used as literary and historical content rather than religious instruction,” former public school administrator Nancy Barker told the board. “The Bible references will provide students with the background knowledge you will need to understand the books, the speeches, poems and important documents that have shaped our civilization.”

‘Not all of us believe the same’

Board member Tiffany Clark, a Christian and Democrat who represents parts of Dallas-Forth Worth, has vocally opposed the proposed curriculum. Clark said she and some of her Christian constituents believe “Bible lessons should be taught on Sundays.”

“Not all of us believe the same,” Clark said, noting that Christian denominations reference different translations of the Bible and at times differ in their interpretations.

The proposed curriculum mandates specific Bible translations, including the King James Bible, which is widely used by Protestant and Evangelical churches but is avoided by the Roman Catholic Church.

Clark also says she fears the emphasis on Christian texts would alienate children who come from other religious backgrounds and prevent their parents from solely shaping their religious education. About a third of adults in Texas identify as non-Christian, according to Pew Research Center surveys from 2023-2024.

Though parents would have the option to opt their children out of some of the required teachings, Clark said, missing lessons could impact students’ test scores. Because the texts would be part of the curriculum, they could be included on standardized testing, potentially impacting the school district’s test record if students do not perform well.

One mother who spoke before the school board Monday in support of the proposal said she believes Texas has always stood for “giving our kids the knowledge they need to succeed.”

“Keeping biblical references in our social studies standards isn’t about pushing my religion, it’s about giving our students a complete education here and making sure they understand the history,” the mother said.

However, teachers may be put in a position to teach religious texts they are not familiar or comfortable with, said Rabbi Joshua Fixler with Congregation Emanu El in Houston.

“This list is full of Christian texts that are inappropriate for public school classrooms. As a rabbi and a parent of Jewish kids, I think it is vital that this board make a distinction between teaching about religion and teaching religion. This list will force teachers to cross that line,” Fixler said.

If put into effect, the mandated literature curriculum could be a first of its kind, according to Antero Garcia, president of the National Council of Teachers of English and a Stanford University education professor.

Garcia told the AP he doesn’t know of any other state with a similar list. Educators at the district and school levels are generally able to choose what texts their students will read, he said.

Kasey Meehan, director of PEN America’s Freedom to Read program, told the AP she believes such a mandated reading list would be unique to Texas.

“I think there’s lots of state lists that exist that are like advised readings, suggested readings,” she told the AP.

Death toll in Venezuela

Death toll in Venezuela rises to at least 589, authorities say

By Lauren Kent and Yelena Gonzalez

The death toll following the earthquakes in Venezuela has risen to 589, with 2,980 people injured, according to acting President Delcy Rodríguez on Friday.

The update comes as rescuers work to find more people trapped under the rubble during the critical “golden window” of up to 72 hours following the earthquake. The death toll is expected to rise significantly as search teams find more victims.

“We haven’t slept a wink in our efforts to save lives,” Rodríguez told Venezuela’s state broadcaster VTV, as she also praised the arrival of international assistance and emergency crews. “We have saved dozens of lives.”

VTV also reported that search and rescue teams are concentrating efforts on the state of La Guaira, which appears to be the most affected area. The government said it has also established a stockpile center of food, water and medicines for those in need at the foreign ministry in Caracas.

Maybe god is punishing them for sucking orange baboon's dick?

Delcy Rodríguez’s Venezuela is in such dire straits that she can't afford to reject aid from friends or foes

Analysis by Alfredo Meza

Four hours after powerful earthquakes devastated parts of Venezuela’s northern coast and the capital, Caracas, El Salvador’s President Nayib Bukele announced that he had offered aid to the Venezuelan government to help deal with the tragedy’s aftermath. Ninety minutes later, acting leader Delcy Rodríguez reposted the message from the Central American president — a man whom the Chavista movement regards as the nemesis of its political project — not only thanking him for the offer but also instructing the Venezuelan Foreign Ministry to coordinate the support.

“Solidarity between our peoples is an invaluable force at times like these,” wrote Nicolás Maduro’s former vice president.

Beyond the solidarity such tragedies inspire and the accompanying political rhetoric, Rodríguez has no room to turn away any government willing to lend a hand during this crisis. The South American nation’s economic situation is critical following disastrous fiscal management and the imposition of US economic sanctions on the Central Bank of Venezuela and the state-owned oil company, Petróleos de Venezuela, which generates 96% of the foreign currency entering the public coffers. Between 2013 and 2021, the country’s economy shrank by three-quarters.

Figures from the Central Bank of Venezuela offer a glimpse into the magnitude of the task facing Rodríguez. In 1998 — the year before Hugo Chávez took office — the country’s total external debt stood at US$28.311 billion. Twenty years later, the last year for which official figures in this category were published, the country owed $108.369 billion.

Currently, estimates by economist Asdrúbal Oliveros, of the Institute for Economic and Social Research at Andrés Bello Catholic University, place the figure at US$161.3 billion.

The bottom line: Given the scale of the tragedy and the size of its foreign debt, Venezuela needs far more than offers to assist those affected and rebuild its infrastructure. The aftermath of the earthquakes compounds an ongoing crisis that has forced millions of Venezuelans to live in a wartime economy over the last decade, despite not being in a formal armed conflict.

Earthquake...

Medics struggling to reach patients and residents terrified to return home, aid groups say

By Sharon Braithwaite and Charlotte Reck

As the official death toll rises following Wednesday night’s colossal twin quake disaster in Venezuela, and anxiety about the whereabouts of loved ones persists, aid organizations fear millions more are in dire need.

Here’s the latest from United Nations agencies and partners on the ground:

The International Organization for Migration (IOM) estimates up to 6.8 million people have been affected by the deadly quakes, a figure based on the latest available population and damage projections.

In addition to emergency medical care, people “who have lost everything” need temporary shelter, safe water, sanitation, healthcare, protection and essential relief items, said Zoe Brennan from the IOM. Later, the recovery will need to be sustained “to help families rebuild their homes, restore livelihoods and recover with dignity,” she said.

The International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies (IFRC), a UN partner, said rescuers are digging with their bare hands in some quake-hit centers to save those trapped beneath the rubble of collapsed buildings and homes.

People “are still terrified to re-enter what were their homes or other structures,” the organization said.

Another IFRC spokesperson, Loyce Pace, said citizens who have lost everything are facing institutional challenges: “People left everything and nothing is functioning as it should, or as it has, in these areas,” she told journalists in Geneva via video from Panama City.

The health emergencies director for the Pan American Health Organization (PAHO), the Regional Office for the UN World Health Organization, described medical teams under pressure to triage mass casualties and provide trauma care for broken bones, burns and other injuries associated with buildings collapsing, particularly in areas where search and rescue operations are ongoing.

Dr. Ciro Ugarte said reaching hospitals, homes and those in need remains “very difficult” for teams working on the ground, who are clambering through rubble and debris to deliver vital treatment.

Hiding

They Found Tom Kean Jr.

But the sighting raised more questions for New Jersey’s once-missing congressman.

Inae Oh

Tom Kean Jr. was once lost, but now he is found. At home in Westfield, New Jersey, waiting for you in a suit and tie, with his wife silently smiling in the background.

Sound strange? Well, that’s how the New Jersey Republican greeted a New York Times reporter on Wednesday night, the first sighting since effectively vanishing in March due to an undisclosed health condition and missing more than 100 votes in the House. Kean’s absence sparked intense speculation, particularly in the lead-up to his primary election earlier this month. (He ran unchallenged, made zero campaign appearances, and won.)

So what was it like to see Kean in the flesh? Honestly, it seemed unsettling!

He could be seen from the street on Wednesday evening, standing in a brightly lit front room of his Westfield home just before 8:45 p.m.

“It’s good to see you,” he said after a reporter for The New York Times rang his doorbell. He was wearing a dark suit and a red tie. “I’ll talk to you next week,” he said. “Thank you.”

Mr. Kean’s wife, Rhonda, stood in the background, smiling pleasantly. He declined additional comment and closed the door.

Last week, Kean’s office announced that the congressman would return to Congress on June 30 and finally explain the mystery surrounding his monthslong absence. But will Kean explain walking around one’s house in formalwear? At bedtime? What about the ghost stock trades? That’s what I want to know.

Anti-Immigrant Supreme Court

The Anti-Immigrant Supreme Court

Three cases from this week alone show the GOP justices are eager to back Trump’s nativist agenda.

Pema Levy

The Supreme Court made one thing plain this week: It is an anti-immigrant court. There were hints before—big ones, to be honest. But in three rulings this week, the Republican-appointed justices voted to green light Trump administration policies against immigrants that both defy federal law and carry a massive humanitarian toll. This week’s decisions display, at best, a callous disregard for the wellbeing and safety of millions of people. At worst, they signal that an anti-immigrant mindset has taken hold of the court’s conservative wing.

On Thursday, the court issued two decisions with shocking human consequences. First, in Mullin v. Al Otro Lado, the court allowed the administration to deny immigrants the right to apply for asylum simply by preventing them from technically crossing the border. The relevant law states that immigrants “arriving in” the US may apply for asylum. In a gotcha-type trick typical of a middle school bully, the administration claims that if it can prevent people from physically stepping across the border, they can ignore all the mandatory processes Congress set-up to process asylum seekers who come to the nation’s doorstep. The 6-3 majority agreed, using a juvenile grammatical argument to render the law contradictory and unenforceable. Because Congress used the preposition “in,” the administration is now free to defy the law and deny thousands of immigrants fleeing persecution their right to apply for asylum. The conclusion is as stupid as it is cruel.

Justice Samuel Alito’s majority opinion in the case, joined by the other five GOP appointees, ignores the policy’s devastating toll. But Justice Sonia Sotomayor’s dissent does not. She describes the violence visited upon immigrants as they endlessly wait in makeshift camps along the border to be able to apply for asylum, and the tragedy of mothers, fathers, and children drowning in the Rio Grande after being turned away from a port of entry. 

“The current asylum system developed in response to the international moral reckoning that followed the Holocaust and World War II,” Sotomayor wrote, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. In 1939, the United States turned away the M.S. St. Louis carrying Jewish refugees. Forced to return to Europe, many of its passengers died in concentration camps. “Congress passed the Refugee Act in 1980 because it did not want this country to repeat the mistakes of its past,” she continued. “Yet if the refugees on the M.S. St. Louis were to walk up to a port of entry on our southern border today, the majority’s interpretation would allow immigration officers to refuse even to consider their asylum applications by physically blocking them from stepping foot onto U.S. soil.”

“The consequences of today’s decision are predictable,” she concluded. “More people will die. More people will attempt to cross the border illegally, and some will make it while others will not.” Like in 1939, the blame for that bloodshed will be on the United States. In place of the statutory scheme Congress erected to remedy past mistakes, the majority lets the Trump administration repeat them. 

Whereas the asylum case allowed the Trump administration to turn away people seeking humanitarian relief, the next opinion gave it effectively unreviewable power to strip millions of immigrants of humanitarian relief they are already receiving in the US. Under federal law, the executive branch can grant people from crisis-torn countries what’s known as Temporary Protected Status, allowing them to legally stay in the US while their home countries remain unsafe. These TPS designations are periodically reviewed and can be extended or terminated depending on if conditions have improved.

In Alito’s opinion in Mullin v. Doe, the Supreme Court allowed the Trump administration to prematurely terminate TPS for 350,000 immigrants from Haiti and Syria. The decision frees the administration to strip legal status from 1.3 million immigrants from 17 countries. 

In revoking TPS for Haitians, the administration made a mockery of the legally-required process. Yet the Roberts Court blessed that lawlessness on Thursday by finding that the decision to revoke TPS is generally unreviewable by courts. As a result, the rules Congress put into law to govern TPS designations are now mere suggestions. Just as in the case about blocking immigrants from ports of entry, the six justices in the majority gave the president the authority to run roughshod over the law. In both cases, mostly nonwhite immigrants will suffer the dire consequences.

While the decision left the door open for people stripped of TPS to make a constitutional claim, as Alito’s opinion shows, it’s unclear whether this court would ever agree there was a valid one. In this case, the plaintiffs argued the revocation was driven by racial animus in violation of the 14th Amendment’s equal protection mandate. The majority brushed aside the cascade of racial dog whistles and stereotypes Trump targeted at Haitians in the US. “None of the cited statements by either the President or the Secretary was overtly racial, and in substance all expressed policy views that could rest on race-neutral justifications,” Alito wrote.

In her dissent, Kagan accuses the majority of refusing to quote the presidential language that they claim is so innocent. So Kagan, joined by the other Democratic appointees, memorializes it in her dissent:

Haitians are “eating the dogs . . . . They’re eating the cats. They’re eating—they’re eating the pets of the people that live [in Springfield, Ohio].” And: Haitians are also eating “other things too that they’re not supposed to be.” And: Haitians in the United States “probably have AIDS.” And: Haiti is a “shithole country,” which is “filthy, dirty, [and] disgusting.” And: Haitian immigration is “like a death wish for our country.” And: Haitians, along with some others, are “poisoning the blood” of our country. And: “Why is it we only take people from shithole countries” like “Haiti [and] Somalia”? “Why cannot we have some people from Norway [and] Sweden?” 

Under Supreme Court precedent, a plausible race-neutral justification is not enough to overcome evidence of a racist motive. And yet, just as it waved the law aside, the court waves away the pesky 14th Amendment (at least as it pertains to racial minorities). After oral arguments in the TPS case, the attorney for the Syrian plaintiffs, Ahilan Arulanantham, had said that the question before the court is whether the government can “ignore the law when it tries to take away someone’s immigration status.” 

When it comes to TPS, the answer is yes. When it comes to asylum seekers, the answer is yes. And even for immigrants granted permanent residency, the Supreme Court placed executive caprice over the law.

In a third case this week, the Roberts Court also answered yes to demoting the status of green card holders, permanent residents who have lived in the United States for years, even decades. On Tuesday, in Blanche v. Lau, the same 6-3 majority gave border officials the discretion to take away a green card at a port of entry if they suspect that the legal permanent resident reentering the country may have committed a crime involving moral turpitude, a vague grouping of crimes in immigration law. As my colleague Isabela Dias wrote Tuesday, “agents at the border have just been given exceptional discretion to bypass protections generally afforded to green card holders.”

In her dissent, Jackson explained that the decision undermined the “benefits and security that come with having a green card,” empowering border officials to reclassify a permanent resident’s status on a hunch, then justify it later with “post hoc evidence.” Just as in the other two decisions from this week, in Lau the Supreme Court destabilizes the entire immigration system, relied upon not just by immigrants and their families—but also employers like hospitals and universities—by replacing the certainty of the law with the whims of the president and his agents.

With just a few days left before the justices begin their summer recess, we are still awaiting the court’s ruling on the meaning of birthright citizenship. The Trump administration is seeking to deny citizenship to thousands of people born in the US to parents of temporary visitors and undocumented immigrants. The justices are expected to reject this attempt and uphold the principle, written plainly in the Constitution, that virtually all people born in the US are citizens.

The justices may think that, by upholding birthright citizenship, they can wash their hands of the anti-immigrant stench from these three rulings. They may presume that their refusal to acknowledge Trump’s blatant racism will be cleansed when they sign an opinion bashing slavery and praising the principle of equality. They may hope that in recognizing the practical consequences of ending birthright citizenship, the cruel results of this week’s rulings will be overshadowed.

But no matter what happens in the birthright citizenship case, this court is a partner in the administration’s cruel, racist, anti-immigrant crusade. In just one week, the majority showed its true colors.

Movement to Overthrow the Government of Albania

How Jared Kushner and Ivanka Trump Sparked a Movement to Overthrow the Government of Albania

Their vision of swank resorts in protected areas set off a “Flamingo Revolution.”

by Mei Seva

Every day, for more than three weeks running, tens of thousands of Albanians have taken to the streets, a peaceful mass movement seeking nothing less than a complete overthrow of the government.

The “Flamingo Revolution,” as local activists have dubbed it, was set off by the luxury resort projects that Donald Trump’s daughter, Ivanka, and her husband, Jared Kushner, plan to build on nature reserves in Albania. At the beginning of May, a barbed-wire fence was erected in the Vjosa-Narta Protected Landscape in Zvërnec, restricting access to one of the most treasured natural coastlines and one of the Mediterranean’s last untouched coastal ecosystems.

Activists, residents, and members of the Levizja Bashkë political party gathered to protest the fences, and after security guards violently dragged a demonstrator through the property, more protests erupted and the story went global.

Javanka’s vision includes up to 10,000 “units of villas,” priced far beyond what most Albanians can afford, to be built in an area where many locals lack access to 24-7 running water. Albania, which has set a goal of 2030 for admission to the European Union, is obligated to repeal Law 21/2024, which clashes with EU conservation standards, but so far has failed to do so.

The ongoing protest movement set off by the Kushner projects, has turned into something much larger, with youth chanting “Çohuni nga kafja! (Get up from the cafes!)” each night as they flood the streets of Tirana, Albania’s capital.

Their immediate goal is Rama’s resignation and the dissolution of his government; in its place, the protesters are demanding a year-long, interim technocratic leadership to prepare Albania for new elections, along with a two-term limit for prime ministers, nullification of Law 21/2024, and legislative reforms related to foreign investment and elections.

You can tell a lot about a movement from protesters’ chants. One that has united Albanians left and right is “Rama Burg, Berisha Burg” (Rama jail, Berisha jail), a call for the imprisonment of the country’s two most predominant political bosses, Socialist Rama and Democrat Sali Berisha, whose parties have been mired in corruption scandals ever since Albania transitioned from state socialism to democracy in 1991.

Berisha has been charged with corruption directly, while Rama’s Deputy Prime Minister Belinda Balluku, her predecessor, Arben Ahmetaj, and Tirana’s mayor, Erion Veliaj, have all been indicted by Albania’s Special Anti-Corruption Prosecution agency. Among the other chants: “Revolution!” “The end has come for you!” “We are the opposition!” “Cancel the Project!” “Rama, resign!” And “A new Albania!” 

Savvy Gen Zers, content creators, and influencers have flooded Instagram with protest videos, memes, informational content, and revolutionary posters and artwork that are helping to fuel the movement—and prompting Rama to blame the protests on social media algorithms he says are being hijacked and fueled by foreign agents.

In interviews, the PM has downplayed the opposition. Rama says the Kushner-Trump project will proceed even if 500,000 Albanians take to the streets—and that the Socialist Party’s sweep in 2025 is evidence of his popular support. He also has referenced the investment of roughly $4.6 billion in the Vlorë region, with an estimated $1.6 billion just for Sazan island—a no-brainer, he says, for a nation whose GDP is only about $33 billion.

But the unprecedented youth protest movement signals something else—widespread discontent. It has spawned the largest public demonstrations since the collapse of the communist regime in 1991. Since then, approximately 40 percent of the population has left Albania, and more than 50,000, mostly young adults, still migrate abroad annually—an exodus driven by official corruption, Albania’s high cost of living, and the lack of economic opportunity.

A sizable diaspora has spawned sister protests in several European and American cities; on June 20, hundreds of Albanian expats flew in and descended on Tirana in support of the protesters, leading to the movement’s largest rally yet, with more than 100,000 in attendance. Outside the city, in beach towns such as Kakome and Rrjoll, protesters followed the example set by their peers in Zvërnec, tearing down the fences and barriers blocking coastal access to protest the privatization of natural areas by powerful business interests.

The movement is grassroots and decentralized, with no clear leaders, only protest “coordinators.” It is a revolt against the status quo and the political establishment that has ruled Albania for the past 36 years. It is a protest against corruption, and oligarchy.

It has united people across the political spectrum—youth, environmental activists, pensioners, young families, and influencers coming together to build momentum and pressure Rama to resign. Nightly rallies at the Boulevard of Martyrs are family-friendly, with a dedicated children’s drawing area run by local artists and volunteers, and a “people’s podium” where citizens can voice their discontent. Each night, after the rallies, protesters march through the streets of Tirana, with residents waving them on from balconies, taxi drivers honking their horns, and tourists looking on from cafes—and sometimes even joining in.

In a country as small as Albania, with just 2.3 million residents, 100,000  protesters is the equivalent of 12.7 million in the United States. And it doesn’t appear as though the movement will lose steam anytime soon.

Don't forget Epstein..

 

Not funny

 

Limit OpenAI’s latest model launch

Trump administration steps in to limit OpenAI’s latest model launch

OpenAI will now make its soon-to-be-released GPT-5.6 model available to a small group of government-approved partners.

By Cheyenne Haslett

OpenAI’s newest artificial intelligence model will be available only to a small group of U.S. companies and organizations approved by the Trump administration, two people familiar with the discussions said, further signaling the Trump administration is tightening the reins on AI regulation.

Details about the latest model, GPT-5.6, have not yet been released publicly. The company did not initially plan to restrict the release of the general-use model, but changed course at the White House’s request and in consultation with the Office of Science and Technology Policy and the Office of the National Cyber Director, the two people said, granted anonymity to describe internal discussions about OpenAI’s latest product release.

The Information first reported on the administration’s intervention in GPT-5.6’s launch, citing a leaked memo from OpenAI CEO Sam Altman to staff on Thursday, in which he said that while the controlled release was not the “preferred” method for announcing its latest AI model, the company was hopeful it could work with the government to develop a more “sustainable” approach to unveiling its iterations of models going forward.

The White House’s rigorous oversight in the rollout of new AI models comes as it continues to spar with OpenAI competitor Anthropic over its newest model, Fable 5. Anthropic was forced to pull Fable 5 just days after its public release, following concerns that the model’s guardrails were less secure than the company had suggested.

The White House made its first significant step in regulating AI earlier this month, when President Donald Trump signed an executive order to manage the release of powerful new AI models with advanced hacking capabilities. The order was sparked by Anthropic’s most advanced model, Claude Mythos, which was made available only to a select group of trusted researchers and cybersecurity companies, as the company warned that the model could be used to launch major cyberattacks if it fell into the wrong hands.

OpenAI has similarly released its most cyber-capable model, GPT-5.5-Cyber, to a small number of companies and organizations.

But the executive order, meant to create a process for evaluating the most advanced models, is still in its nascent stages and hasn’t yet established clear rules of the road for companies as they continue to race ahead with the latest AI advancements, competing with each other and with adversarial countries like China.

The result is an open-ended and confusing regulatory landscape for AI companies to navigate, as the administration — which previously pledged to prioritize innovation over regulation — now faces down the potential risks posed by rapidly developing AI.

In a statement, the White House said it “continues to collaborate with frontier AI labs to develop shared approaches for addressing the challenges of scaling this technology.”

OpenAI did not immediately respond to a request for details on the rollout of GPT-5.6.

The June executive order calls on companies to voluntarily submit models to the government for review 30 days before their planned release. The vetting period is meant to give federal agencies time to gauge what threats the products may pose to sensitive financial, national security and other critical systems.

But the details of how models will be evaluated and which models need to be reviewed are still being worked out in White House meetings with the companies over the next several weeks, as directed by the executive order.

Some have criticized the administration’s approach and called for clearer guidelines.

“AI is licensed now, but the requirements change constantly and are always a secret, even to the administration itself, which will discover the rules spontaneously in real time as it reacts to events,” Dean Ball, a former Trump administration AI policy adviser who recently joined OpenAI, wrote on X in mid-June.

A week later, as Fable 5 remained offline but before OpenAI faced its own showdown with the government, Ball had a prescient prediction: “I’d assume the whole AI industry in America is effectively frozen from new public releases until USG resolves the Fable situation they have stumbled into,” he wrote.