Eight states sue OpenAI over ChatGPT safety concerns, accusing company of harming children
The states allege OpenAI violated consumer protection laws and want courts to impose civil penalties and stop the company from misleading the public.

Eight US states filed separate lawsuits against OpenAI on Wednesday over ChatGPT safety concerns, accusing the artificial intelligence company of harming children and misleading customers about the popular chatbot’s risks.
The states, Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska, West Virginia, Arkansas, Arizona, Idaho, and Montana, filed individually in each state’s own courts. The complaints allege violations of local consumer protection laws by failing to warn customers about ChatGPT’s dangers. Reuters first reported the lawsuits earlier.
“OpenAI claims ChatGPT is safe while it’s giving dangerous medical advice, encouraging people to hurt others, and coaching people to commit suicide — all while pretending to be their fake friend,” said Brenna Bird, Iowa Attorney General. “My lawsuit is about protecting our kids and holding OpenAI accountable under our state law.” Beyond those claims, the complaints allege the chatbot is dangerous to vulnerable users by degrading critical thinking skills, encouraging paranoias and delusions, and promoting unhealthy behaviors and relationships. The states cite wrongful death lawsuits filed by family members of teens and adults who allege ChatGPT played a role in their loved ones’ deaths. They also accuse OpenAI of collecting data from minors and not doing enough to keep underage users off the chatbot. The lawsuits cite recent rogue AI hacking incidents as evidence of OpenAI’s alleged recklessness. Arizona’s complaint accuses OpenAI of abandoning its original safety-first nonprofit mission in favor of a profit-driven approach that sidelined essential safeguards, describing the company as a cautionary tale of AI development without adequate protections. The states allege OpenAI put profits over safety and misleadingly presented ChatGPT as a “safe, youth-appropriate tool that puts safety first.”
What the states are seeking
The states are asking courts to force OpenAI to pay civil penalties and to stop the company from misleading the public about ChatGPT’s safety. Some states are also seeking the deletion of unlawfully collected personal data. The specific legal requests vary by state, with each filing tailored to its own local legal framework.
OpenAI’s response
OpenAI pushed back against the claims. The company has already built age-specific protections into its product, spokesperson Drew Pusateri said in a statement. “While no system can be perfect, we’ll continue to work with experts to inform our work and build additional safeguards, such as the parental controls, break reminders and age-appropriate model protections that exist today,” Pusateri said. “We’re committed to working with states on advancing pragmatic AI policies that apply to the entire AI industry - not just one company.”
Prior actions
Florida sued first. Attorney General James Uthmeier filed suit against OpenAI in June, alleging the company knowingly released an unsafe product that could harm users. OpenAI launched ChatGPT for Teens in August, a dedicated experience for minors that includes educational features and age-appropriate safeguards intended to reduce exposure to developmentally inappropriate or harmful content. At the time, OpenAI said in a release that teens should be able to use AI to learn, create, and explore. But the company said that access should come with protections reflecting their developmental stage, reinforcing real-world relationships and supporting healthy use over time. Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird announced Wednesday’s lawsuits in a press release, saying Iowa’s suit aims to vindicate the rights of Iowans affected by OpenAI’s conduct.
Sources & methods
This article draws on reporting from CNBC and The Verge, including court filings, public statements from Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird and OpenAI spokesperson Drew Pusateri, and prior coverage of OpenAI product launches and legal challenges.


