Back to everyone

Politicians and public officials

Andy Biggs

U.S. representative from Arizona, chair of the House Judiciary crime subcommittee

3 records

Portrait source: Gage Skidmore, CC BY-SA 4.0

Records

Unfortunately, like most technical innovations, the criminal element has begun to use AI to enhance their elicit activities. The AI-enabled threats continue to evolve as bad actors use AI technology in a wide spectrum of criminal enterprises. From deepfake scams and synthetic identity fraud to financial crimes and child sexual abuse material, CSAM, the landscape continues to evolve at a rapid pace as AI provides users with enhanced capabilities.

Exact quote, beginning

Andy Biggs

U.S. representative from Arizona, chair of the House Judiciary crime subcommittee

In his opening statement at a July 2025 House Judiciary subcommittee hearing, Andy Biggs said criminals have begun using AI across a wide spectrum of criminal enterprises, from deepfake scams and synthetic identity fraud to financial crimes and child sexual abuse material.

U.S. Representative from Arizona and Chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government SurveillanceJuly 16, 2025House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance hearing, Artificial Intelligence and Criminal Exploitation: A New Era of Risk

Context and checks

Surrounding words

Today, AI is best understood as a branch of computer science that leverages large scale data processing, algorithmic modeling, and modern hardware to enable machines to perform tasks typically requiring human cognition. Unfortunately, like most technical innovations, the criminal element has begun to use AI to enhance their elicit activities. The AI-enabled threats continue to evolve as bad actors use AI technology in a wide spectrum of criminal enterprises. From deepfake scams and synthetic identity fraud to financial crimes and child sexual abuse material, CSAM, the landscape continues to evolve at a rapid pace as AI provides users with enhanced capabilities. The AI-based or AI-driven threats and schemes can cost businesses millions of dollars a year including both prevention and falling prey to them. In one case, fraudsters used AI to clone a CEO's voice and authorized a wire transfer. Among corporations that experienced a rise in deepfake incidents, 75 percent of deepfakes impersonated a CEO or another C suite executive.

How this was checked

  • Quote located in the captured page; spacing normalised for display.

Reviewed by

an AI reviewer that read the whole source · an automatic character-by-character check

We've touched on it lightly here today using different terms, but my question is at what point do we no longer see computational decisionmaking with a human first mover and you have an algorithmically iterative process that essentially--and we are there in some extent now, but we are not totally there because human interaction is still the first mover. At some point it won't be a human that is the first mover anymore; it will be the algorithm itself.

Exact quote, beginning

Andy Biggs

U.S. representative from Arizona, chair of the House Judiciary crime subcommittee

Asked as a question. Not stated as a belief.

Andy Biggs, chairing a July 2025 House Judiciary subcommittee hearing, asked his witnesses how long before an algorithm rather than a human is the first mover in computational decisionmaking, adding that we probably thought artificial super intelligence would arrive by 2050 but that it looks like maybe before 2030.

U.S. Representative from Arizona and Chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government SurveillanceJuly 16, 2025House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance hearing, Artificial Intelligence and Criminal Exploitation: A New Era of Risk

Context and checks

Surrounding words

He talked about artificial intelligence and Grok 4 is going to have the intelligence--it already has beyond a Ph.D., engineering, science, genius, et cetera, an artificial super intelligence. We've touched on it lightly here today using different terms, but my question is at what point do we no longer see computational decisionmaking with a human first mover and you have an algorithmically iterative process that essentially--and we are there in some extent now, but we are not totally there because human interaction is still the first mover. At some point it won't be a human that is the first mover anymore; it will be the algorithm itself. How long before we get there? How do we get there and prevent the crime and provide the deterrence that is necessary? For the hypothetical I give you, how long before adjudicating whether there is probable cause or not for a search warrant or an arrest warrant is merely algorithmically sustained as opposed to having a human make that determination? With that bizarre question but acknowledging that we are actually moving so rapidly that we probably thought by 2050 you would be getting to artificial super intelligence, but it looks like maybe before 2030 you are going to be in artificial super intelligence. Dr. Bowne? Then we will go down the whole panel. Dr. Bowne. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Certainly, a thought-provoking exercise.

What this quote does not say

  • The passage is framed by Biggs as a question to the witness panel; the only affirmative forward-looking content is the hedged aside about timing.
  • The witness who answered first, Dr. Andrew Bowne, replied that artificial general and super intelligence 'are still theoretical and not a foregone conclusion'; Biggs did not restate or revise his timing aside afterward.

How this was checked

  • Quote located in the captured page; spacing normalised for display.

Reviewed by

an AI reviewer that read the whole source · an automatic character-by-character check

On the other hand, AI is increasingly integrated into police investigations offering new tools and capabilities for law enforcement agencies into the backdrop of rapidly expanding digital data sources and increasing demands on law enforcement agencies.

Exact quote, beginning

Andy Biggs

U.S. representative from Arizona, chair of the House Judiciary crime subcommittee

In his opening statement at a July 2025 House Judiciary subcommittee hearing, Andy Biggs said AI can help law enforcement solve crimes and process large volumes of data, but that benefiting from it requires reliable data and human oversight while addressing privacy, bias, and ethical considerations.

U.S. Representative from Arizona and Chair of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government SurveillanceJuly 16, 2025House Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime and Federal Government Surveillance hearing, Artificial Intelligence and Criminal Exploitation: A New Era of Risk

Context and checks

Surrounding words

On average, phishing attacks cost $4.9 million per breach. On the other hand, AI is increasingly integrated into police investigations offering new tools and capabilities for law enforcement agencies into the backdrop of rapidly expanding digital data sources and increasing demands on law enforcement agencies. AI provides a more adaptable and comprehensible approach to solving crimes, compared to traditional methods leveraging data analytics, machine learning, and pattern recognition to enhance investigations and assist with administrative tasks. This is also potentially a problem, as well, as we seek to balance curbing AI with our civil rights. AI can also help process large volumes of data, identify patterns, and generate actionable insights, and in turn, these applications can improve efficiency, accuracy, and resource allocation with investigative processes. However, to fully benefit from AI applications, law enforcement entities need reliable data, human oversight, while also tackling issues related to privacy, bias, and ethical considerations. Addressing the continued misuse of AI will require a varied approach while also raising public awareness about the risks associated with AI-generated content. Law enforcement agencies must engage openly with community stakeholders, legal experts, and the public to communicate the intended uses, benefits, and limitations of AI technologies. The collaborative effort to both prevents the misuse of AI while encouraging lawful application is required to effectively navigate this evolving landscape. I am excited about today's hearing. I think this is the first of its kind. I believe it will be only the first of its kind as we consider AI and its continued expansion of influence on our lives.

What this quote does not say

  • It narrows and balances Biggs's AI-risk framing but does not retract his criminal-harm claims or his later superintelligence estimate.

How this was checked

  • Quote located in the captured page; spacing normalised for display.

Reviewed by

an AI reviewer that read the whole source · an automatic character-by-character check