Trump order tells the US executive branch to say 'Super Intelligence' instead of 'AI'

President Donald Trump signed an executive order on 29 September 2026, US time, titled "Inaugurating The Era Of Super Intelligence". The White House page for the order is timed 21:17 UTC that day, which is 02:47 IST on 30 September 2026. Politico describes the signing as Tuesday. The order tells the United States executive branch to change the words it uses. It does not, on its own text, change a law.

To the maximum extent permitted by law, executive departments and agencies are directed to use "Super Intelligence" and "SI" in place of "Artificial Intelligence" and "AI". The documents named are official correspondence, public communications, websites, reports, policy documents and other non-statutory documents inside the executive branch. That wording is the order's. The White House fact sheet, Politico, the BBC, The Guardian and UPI report the same direction. UPI's phrase for the limit is "wherever legally permitted". The Guardian places it within the executive branch. The scope is that branch, and only as far as the law allows. It is not a rule for Congress, for the courts, for state governments, or for private speech.

Two limits sit in the same order. Previously issued regulations, contracts and other historical documents do not have to be altered. And, for the purposes of the order, "Super Intelligence" means the technologies already covered by the statutory definition of artificial intelligence in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3). No law has been amended. No legal definition has been replaced. The new words, inside this order, point at the old statute. A reading that the United States has banned the term "AI" is not what the order does. It tells executive agencies which words to use in the documents it lists.

There is a next step, and it is still a proposal. Within 60 days the White House science and technology adviser must submit proposed legislative language for a federal definition. The order asks for proposed language. It does not enact that language, and the reports checked do not say what the proposal will contain. UPI notes that changes to the legal definition are to be proposed. A proposal is not a statute.

The order follows a speech Trump gave at the UN General Assembly the week before, on the same idea. The BBC and The Guardian place that speech last week. This report uses that timing and does not adopt any characterisation of the speech.

The same day, a second document was signed, and it is not the order. Trump and six technology executives signed a "White House Accord on Super Intelligence". The BBC counts seven signatories, which is Trump plus those six. The Guardian calls the accord a voluntary commitment with no enforcement mechanisms. Al Jazeera calls it voluntary and non-binding. UPI says it is not mandated by law and carries no penalties. AP, via PBS, calls it a voluntary accord. Those descriptions agree: the accord does not bind anyone the way a statute would, and it is separate from the executive order. This report does not list the executives, does not describe the accord's internal scheme, and does not claim that Neutral Politics was first to report either document. The order and the accord were already in the White House text and in those news reports.

What's next

Executive agencies have a terminology instruction, limited to the executive branch and to what the law permits, with old regulations and contracts left as they are. The statutory definition in 15 U.S.C. 9401(3) is unchanged. A proposed federal definition is due from the science adviser within 60 days. The technology accord remains a voluntary pledge, not the order.