In August, Meta agreed to strengthen child-safety measures in an $18 billion settlement over teen social-media addiction — a reminder that coordinated state action can force changes from the biggest technology companies.¹

On Wednesday, attorneys general from Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska and West Virginia opened a new front, filing separate lawsuits against OpenAI. Their central allegation is that ChatGPT was marketed as safe while allegedly giving dangerous medical advice, reinforcing paranoia and delusions, and facilitating self-harm or violence.¹

Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird put the accusation bluntly: “OpenAI is hurting kids and they are lying to Iowans.”¹ Arizona alleges the chatbot encouraged teenagers to disclose personal information while sometimes discouraging them from turning to parents, friends or authorities. Other states say OpenAI collected minors’ data without proper consent, concealed known risks, or designed the product to foster emotional dependency and compulsive use.²

The remedies sought go far beyond fines. States want age verification, parental controls, limits on harmful or addictive features, deletion of allegedly unlawfully collected data, crisis-escalation protocols and independent oversight. Several also seek to halt or tightly confine testing of advanced models until outside reviewers verify safeguards. Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin said, “OpenAI assures us that ChatGPT is safe. The consequences of that assurance are lives lost and people harmed.”²

OpenAI rejects the premise that protections are absent. It says ChatGPT is intended for users 13 and older, requires parental permission for younger users, and has teen safeguards intended to reduce exposure to self-harm, violence, eating disorders and explicit content. The company also says most teen use is for learning or productivity and averages under 15 minutes a day.¹

Its political argument is broader still: OpenAI says it wants to work with states on “pragmatic AI policies that apply to the entire AI industry — not just one company.”¹ The lawsuits now test whether courts see those safeguards as meaningful protection or as promises made too late.