Pope Leo criticizes Nvidia’s Jensen Huang over AI safety, positioning Vatican as moral counterweight to Big Tech

Pope Leo XIV has publicly called out Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang for his resistance to AI safety regulations, escalating a confrontation between the Vatican and one of the most valuable companies on Earth. The criticism came during a press conference aboard the papal flight returning from France on September 28, 2026, where the Pope addressed growing concerns about AI’s unchecked development.

The Pope’s comments directly rebutted the framing, shared by Huang and President Donald Trump, that expert warnings about AI threats amount to “fake news.” In the Pope’s view, the concerns raised by AI safety researchers are legitimate and demand a serious regulatory response, not dismissal.

A 42,300-word moral framework

The papal critique didn’t materialize out of thin air. It builds on Pope Leo’s encyclical, Magnifica Humanitas, published on May 25, 2026. The document runs 42,300 words and lays out a comprehensive ethical framework for artificial intelligence development.

The encyclical’s central demand is what the Pope calls “disarming” AI. That means extracting it from structures that systematically cause harm, whether to workers, children, or civilians in conflict zones.

Specifically, the document calls for rigorous government oversight of private AI developers, stronger protections for worker rights in an AI-driven economy, safeguards against AI-generated content targeting children, and strict human control over weapon systems.

Pope Leo XIV, the first US-born pope, appears to be deliberately positioning the Vatican as a counterweight to the tech industry’s self-regulation approach.

Huang’s regulatory pushback

Jensen Huang has been one of the loudest voices in Silicon Valley arguing against what he sees as premature regulation of AI. In September 2026, Huang expressed alignment with Trump’s view that AI safety concerns are overblown, a position that puts him at odds not only with the Pope but with a significant portion of the AI research community.

The tension between Huang and Pope Leo reflects a deeper philosophical split in how societies are choosing to approach AI governance. On one side sits the American tech industry’s preferred model: innovate first, regulate only when clear harm emerges. On the other sits the Pope’s framework, which argues that waiting for harm to emerge is itself the harm.

What this means for the AI regulatory landscape

Pope Leo has signaled interest in direct dialogue with tech leaders on AI ethics, positioning the Church as a potential intermediary in global regulatory negotiations, particularly between the US approach of light-touch oversight and the EU’s more aggressive regulatory posture.

Pope Leo has maintained an optimistic view of AI’s potential, which makes his critique of Huang more nuanced than a blanket rejection of technology. He’s not arguing that AI should be stopped. He’s arguing that the people building it shouldn’t also be the only people deciding how it’s governed.