Trump Administration Asks OpenAI to Limit GPT-5.6 Rollout: Reports

President Donald Trump’s administration has asked OpenAI to limit the initial release of GPT-5.6 to a small group of government-approved partners, while federal officials evaluate the model, according to reports by The Information and Axios.

The request marks the second time this month that the U.S. government has intervened to limit the release of a frontier AI model, following its order that Anthropic suspend public access to Claude Fable 5 and Mythos 5 over national security concerns.

According to the reports, the White House’s Office of the National Cyber Director and Office of Science and Technology Policy asked OpenAI to limit GPT-5.6’s rollout while the administration develops a framework for evaluating advanced AI models before wider deployment. Sources familiar with the discussions reportedly said the request was driven by GPT-5.6’s “Mythos-like” capabilities rather than a broader shift in AI policy.

The request follows President Trump’s executive order earlier this month directing federal agencies to establish a voluntary testing framework for advanced AI systems before release, after weeks of internal debate over how the program should be structured.

The move also reflects a shift in the relationship between leading AI builders and Washington after years of developers calling for the government to establish regulations for the industry.

During Senate testimony in 2023, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman urged lawmakers to establish a regulatory agency for advanced AI systems, arguing that independent oversight would eventually be necessary. More recently, Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei argued that the most capable AI models should undergo rigorous government-backed evaluations before deployment because of their potential to enable sophisticated cyberattacks, biological weapons research, and other national security threats.

Those arguments have become increasingly formalized as Anthropic, OpenAI, and Google have each published proposals outlining how frontier AI should be governed. While they differ in their approaches, all three call for structured evaluations of the most capable models, greater transparency around safety testing, independent review of high-risk systems, and a larger role for the government in overseeing AI development.

The administration’s intervention may also test whether the governance frameworks championed by leading AI companies can be applied evenly across the industry. Critics warn that if the largest AI developers help shape rules that are then enforced unevenly, then frontier AI regulation could become a form of regulatory capture that favors a select group of companies while making it harder for competitors to compete.