The state of Florida has filed a lawsuit against OpenAI and its chief executive Sam Altman, accusing the company of knowingly releasing and aggressively marketing ChatGPT while concealing serious risks from the public. It is the first state-led legal action against the artificial intelligence giant.
Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier announced the civil complaint at a news conference on June 22, 2026, framing the case as a consumer-protection matter under Florida's laws against unfair and deceptive trade practices. For more context on this story, see our ongoing AI industry coverage.
"Today, we announced the first-in-the-nation state-led lawsuit against OpenAI and its CEO, Sam Altman," Uthmeier said, according to the Associated Press. "OpenAI and Altman ignored internal and external safety warnings, put children at great risk, and allowed a dangerous product to reach millions of Floridians."
OpenAI did not immediately respond to an email seeking comment from the Associated Press.
What the Complaint Alleges
According to the AP, the civil complaint alleges that OpenAI and Altman prioritized speed to market and commercial gain over user safety and disregarded repeated warnings from experts both inside and outside the company. The lawsuit claims the company deployed a product that facilitates and encourages harm — including self-harm and violence — while falsely assuring users that it was safe.
The complaint further alleges that ChatGPT collects data from minors without meaningful parental oversight and causes behavioral addiction and cognitive harm. It accuses the company of actively downplaying dangerous errors produced by the chatbot.
Florida officials said the state's law prohibits unfair and deceptive trade practices, and the complaint alleges that OpenAI's conduct causes ongoing harm to Floridians and demands accountability. The attorney general did not specify a dollar amount of damages being sought, the AP reported.
Why a State Lawsuit Matters
While OpenAI faces no shortage of litigation — including private class actions and Elon Musk's high-profile challenge to the company's for-profit conversion — a lawsuit brought by a state attorney general carries a different kind of weight. State consumer-protection powers allow regulators to seek broad remedies, including injunctions, civil penalties, and changes to how a company does business within the state.
Florida's decision to name Altman personally is also significant. By suing the CEO directly rather than only the corporate entity, the state is signaling that it wants to hold individual leaders accountable for decisions about how AI products are marketed and deployed. If successful, that approach could become a template for other states weighing whether frontier AI companies have been candid with the public.
The lawsuit is the first of its kind, but few observers expect it to be the last. State attorneys general have increasingly used consumer-protection statutes to police the technology sector, and AI — with its well-documented capacity to produce harmful, misleading, or addictive outputs — offers no shortage of potential claims.
The Child-Safety Angle
The emphasis on minors is likely to resonate far beyond Florida. Lawmakers and regulators across the political spectrum have expressed concern about how AI chatbots interact with children, and several countries have moved to restrict minors' access to generative AI tools. Norway, for example, recently banned the use of generative AI in elementary schools.
By alleging that ChatGPT collects data from minors without meaningful parental oversight and causes behavioral addiction, Florida is tapping into one of the most politically potent arguments against unconstrained AI deployment. That framing could attract allies among other states' attorneys general and among federal regulators who have been debating whether existing children's privacy and consumer-protection laws apply to chatbots.
A Pivotal Moment for OpenAI
The lawsuit arrives at a difficult moment for OpenAI. The company is navigating a conversion from nonprofit to for-profit governance, preparing for a long-anticipated initial public offering, and fending off allegations from competitors and former partners. Leaked audited financials have shown swelling operating losses, even as the company pours resources into custom silicon and infrastructure.
A state-level consumer-protection case adds a new front. If other attorneys general follow Florida's lead — and coordination among states is common in major consumer-protection actions — OpenAI could face a patchwork of lawsuits that complicate its regulatory posture just as it seeks to reassure public-market investors.
Importantly, the case may turn on evidence of what OpenAI knew and when. Consumer-protection claims of this kind typically hinge on the gap between a company's public assurances and its internal awareness of risk. If Florida's discovery process surfaces internal documents showing that OpenAI researchers flagged harms that leadership chose to downplay, the litigation could become a defining test of whether AI safety disclosures are legally enforceable.
The core of Florida's argument is simple and politically potent: that a company selling a product used by millions cannot claim it is safe while privately heeding warnings to the contrary. Whether a court agrees will help define the legal duties that AI companies owe to their users — and could set boundaries that reshape how the entire industry talks about safety.
For now, the message from Tallahassee is unmistakable: states are no longer willing to wait for federal AI rules, and they are prepared to use the tools already on the books to hold AI companies accountable.
---
Stay Ahead of AIGet the latest AI news, analysis, and breakthroughs — all in one place.
Read more AI news →
