A broad, diverse, and influential group of more than one million stakeholders and leaders have signed the Pro-Human AI Declaration, which was issued in New Orleans in March 2026.
The Declaration notes we face a civilizational choice, where some leaders in AI have openly advocated for a race to replace human beings “as creators, counselors, caregivers and companions, then in most jobs and decision-making roles”. This reckless approach, the Declaration notes, “poses risks to societal stability, national security, economic prosperity, civil liberties, privacy, and democratic governance”, and “imperils the human experiences of childhood and family, faith, and community.”
The Pro-Human AI Declaration rejects that approach and says clearly:
“Artificial intelligence should serve humanity, not the reverse.”
AI systems must be “trustworthy and controllable” and “amplify rather than diminish human potential, empower people, enhance human dignity, protect individual liberty, strengthen families and communities, preserve self-governance and help create unprecedented health and prosperity.”
The Declaration details ways to ensure this better future is the one we choose, focusing on actions and standards under five core principles:
- Keeping Humans in Charge
- Avoiding Concentration of Power
- Protecting the Human Experience
- Human Agency and Liberty
- Responsibility and Accountability for AI Companies
This week, the first Pro-Human Assembly was held in Washington, DC. Attendees represented all segments of the political spectrum and joined in further calls for a slow-down of advanced AI development, regulations to protect human rights, civil liberties, and national security, and international cooperation to establish a global treaty requiring AI always remain under human control.
Rep. Greg Casar (D-Texas) called for the United States to lead an urgent process of international AI diplomacy, focused on establishing enforceable norms that ensure basic rights and liberties are never infringed by runaway AI systems.
The Pro-Human movement is not opposed to AI development—only to the creation of smart machines designed to make high-stakes, even life-and-death decisions, while sidelining human managers, elected officials, and stakeholders.
- AI systems should not be deciding who lives or dies in combat situations, or anywhere else.
- AI systems should not be creating their own successors, using code or language human beings cannot track or understand.
- AI systems should not be enabled to negate concerns of danger, illegality, or unethical behavior, because it is through those human concerns that we honor each other’s humanity and basic rights.
We note the leaders of Anthropic, OpenAI, and SpaceX have all called for informed, coordinated regulation of AI development, and a slowdown designed to avoid development of artificial superintelligence that is, in practice, beyond human comprehension or control. They did this after recognizing that even their immensely wealthy organizations filled with the world’s leading experts, cannot fully predict or control what they are developing.
They were joined in these calls not only by AI critics and the Pro-Human movement, but also by more than 1,300 senior engineers at leading AI firms, and by Pope Leo XIV, whose first encyclical, ‘Magnifica Humanitas‘, laid out a detailed and far-reaching studied case for ensuring AI serves humanity.
The historic letter to the faithful affirms “the supreme value of human rights” and notes they are “inherent in the human person and in human dignity”—language that reflects the founding laws of the United States and of the United Nations. “The fundamental dignity of each person, therefore, is neither acquired nor earned, nor does it need to be justified.” It also cites a recent Declaration on human dignity, ‘Dignitas Infinita‘, which affirms:
“Every human person possesses an infinite dignity, inalienably grounded in his or her very being, which prevails in and beyond every circumstance, state, or situation the person may ever encounter.”
We cite these passages here, because they express the most common-sense stance on the relationship between technology and humanity, and because they call for clear actions aimed at safeguarding the rights and dignity of all people.
Only a pro-human approach to artificial intelligence makes sense, and pro-human must mean respectful of the inherent and unalienable human rights of every person who lives now or will live in the future.
Liberate Systems 