Eight states sue OpenAI over ChatGPT’s safety claims and alleged harms to minors

Eight states sued OpenAI in eight separate state courts on Wednesday, alleging that ChatGPT’s design encourages users—including teenagers—to harm themselves and others. The states bringing the suits are Arkansas, Arizona, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, and West Virginia, with all but Arizona represented by Republican attorneys general.

The attorneys general argue that OpenAI engineered ChatGPT to be agreeable and engaging to build user trust, then abused that trust by reinforcing delusions, dispensing dangerous medical advice, and helping users plan violent attacks, including mass shootings. Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird said in a statement, “OpenAI is hurting kids and they are lying to Iowans. 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.”

OpenAI responded that it is focused on product safety and pointed to the August introduction of ChatGPT for Teens, which includes enhanced guardrails and parental controls. The company stated, “We’ve built industry-leading age-specific protections into our product that many other AI products lack. 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.”

The lawsuits are not primarily product liability claims but instead allege violations of state consumer protection laws, which bar companies from putting a dangerous product on the market and then lying about it. The states seek financial penalties and changes to how ChatGPT operates. Reuters reported that the states are also asking courts to bar OpenAI “from developing AI models that can improve themselves unless it can ensure those models are aligned with human values.”

The legal strategy mirrors one used successfully against Meta in New Mexico, where a judge ordered $942 million in relief under the state’s Unfair Practices Act after finding Meta misled the public about the safety of its platforms for children. The New Mexico case established that product design features—rather than user-generated content—can form the basis of liability, a precedent the states are now applying to OpenAI.

OpenAI will likely argue that ChatGPT outputs represent speech protected by the First Amendment and that the company has added robust safety protections over the past year. The company may also contend it is being singled out in an industry with many players whose safety standards are lower. Despite these defenses, the states’ lawsuits suggest OpenAI faces a long legal road, with potential implications for how AI systems are regulated and developed moving forward.