The complaint, filed in state court by Attorney General James Uthmeier, marks the first lawsuit brought by a US state against OpenAI over alleged harms linked to its chatbot. It accuses the company of deceptive and unfair trade practices, negligence and product liability violations, while seeking civil penalties, damages and court-ordered changes to the way ChatGPT interacts with minors.
State lawyers allege OpenAI promoted ChatGPT as a safe and reliable tool while failing to disclose risks that it could encourage self-harm, provide information relevant to violent acts, deepen emotional dependency and collect sensitive information from children without adequate parental oversight. The lawsuit names Altman personally, arguing that he played a central role in pushing product features and commercial growth while safety concerns were allegedly left unresolved.
Uthmeier said OpenAI had chosen the race for artificial intelligence dominance over child safety and public protection. His office is seeking restrictions on the collection of certain data from users under 13 without parental consent, stronger safeguards for minors, changes to product design and potentially billions of dollars in damages.
The lawsuit refers to the 2025 mass shooting at Florida State University in Tallahassee and alleges that ChatGPT was used by the suspect before the attack. Florida authorities opened a separate criminal investigation in April into whether the chatbot’s responses had any connection to the planning of that shooting. OpenAI has rejected responsibility for the tragedy, saying ChatGPT provided information available from public sources and did not encourage unlawful or harmful conduct.
The civil complaint also cites other episodes in which users allegedly relied on ChatGPT during periods of distress, delusion or violent intent. It argues that the chatbot’s conversational style can simulate companionship and empathy in ways that increase user attachment, especially among young people. Florida contends that this design helps maximise engagement and subscription revenue while exposing users to psychological and behavioural risks.
OpenAI has previously said its models are trained to refuse requests that could meaningfully enable violence, self-harm or criminal activity. The company has also said it works with mental health specialists on sensitive cases and may alert law enforcement when conversations suggest an imminent and credible threat. It has introduced or announced additional measures around crisis response, youth safety and parental controls as scrutiny of AI chatbots has intensified.
The Florida case lands as generative AI companies face rising legal and regulatory pressure over safety, privacy, copyright, misinformation and the psychological effects of human-like chatbots. Families and private plaintiffs have filed claims against OpenAI and other chatbot developers alleging that prolonged interactions contributed to self-harm, delusions, violence or wrongful deaths. Several of those cases remain at early stages, leaving courts to decide how existing product liability and consumer protection laws apply to conversational AI systems.
The lawsuit could become a test case for state-level enforcement against AI developers. Unlike federal regulators, state attorneys general can bring consumer protection actions tied to alleged harm within their jurisdictions. Florida’s case argues that ChatGPT is not merely a speech platform but a product whose design choices, marketing claims and safety controls can be tested under laws covering defective products and deceptive practices.
OpenAI is also operating under broader national scrutiny as policymakers debate whether AI regulation should be led mainly by Washington or by individual states. Technology companies have warned that a patchwork of state rules could slow innovation and create conflicting compliance demands. Child safety advocates and some state officials argue that waiting for federal legislation would leave families exposed while AI tools become more embedded in education, social life and work.
The lawsuit places Altman at the centre of a wider argument over executive accountability in the AI sector. Florida claims the OpenAI chief helped steer the company towards rapid deployment and market expansion while internal and external warnings about chatbot risks accumulated. Holding a chief executive personally liable would be a significant escalation if the court allows those claims to advance.
