Texas has sued OpenAI and Sam Altman over ChatGPT, adding a state to the child-safety fight that eight other states began on October 14. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton says the company failed to warn consumers about the product's risks and did not put proper safeguards for minors in place.
What the Texas complaint alleges
According to The Hill's report on the filing, the complaint says OpenAI and Altman marketed their products as "trustworthy, reliable, and safe." Paxton's position is that ChatGPT is prone to errors and hallucinations. The complaint cites users who relied on wrong health information.
The suit also alleges that OpenAI did not put proper safeguards for minors in place, as the state's SCOPE Act requires. Paxton put the core charge in pointed terms. In the complaint, he wrote: "Defendants have built an artificial intelligence empire on the backs of Texans by deceiving them."
The filing date and court for the Texas case were not confirmed in the reporting available for this story. Check the Texas Attorney General's website for the complaint itself before relying on procedural details. Every claim here is an allegation that no court has yet tested.
Eight states filed their own suits on October 14
On October 14, 2026, attorneys general from Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Iowa, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska and West Virginia each filed separate suits in their own state courts. Haynes Boone's alert describes the filings as parallel lawsuits rather than one multistate case. Texas is not part of that group, so at least nine states are now pursuing action against the company.
The states rely on their own consumer-protection laws instead of a single federal action. They argue ChatGPT was designed to be agreeable and emotionally engaging in ways that harm children. The suits allege that OpenAI marketed ChatGPT as safe for children under 13. They seek product changes, civil penalties and the surrender of profits earned from young users, according to Technology.org.
Iowa's petition runs 91 pages, based on the state's release as summarized by OpenTools. At a news conference announcing the action, Iowa Attorney General Brenna Bird said the company "advanced ChatGPT at a high speed." She also said it was "lying to parents and breaking our laws."
What the ChatGPT lawsuits say about minors
The center of these cases is how the product behaves with young users, not only what it says. Several states argue that the design itself, including an agreeable and emotionally engaging style, harms children. That framing lets them rely on consumer-protection and product-design theories while federal rules remain unsettled.
OpenAI's response so far is general. The company says it has built age-specific protections that many rival products lack. Those claims have not been tested in court, and none of the state suits has produced a ruling.
Earlier warnings set the stage. Earlier in 2026, California and Delaware attorneys general warned OpenAI about its safety practices after several deaths reportedly connected to ChatGPT, according to Yahoo News. The current suits follow that pressure.
A separate federal class action, reported as filed October 13, targets OpenAI's collection of children's data, according to SOFX. That report is the only source for the filing, so its status and the scope of its claims remain unclear.
Montana's complaint shows what states want
Montana's complaint, filed in Lewis and Clark County, is the most detailed filing described in the reporting. It pleads six causes of action:
- Two counts under the Montana Consumer Protection Act
- One count under the Montana Consumer Data Privacy Act
- Common-law negligence
- Design-defect and failure-to-warn claims
The complaint also demands a jury trial, per-violation penalties and age verification. The age-verification demand is the one most likely to reach ordinary users. A court order requiring age checks would force the product to identify minors before applying different protections, which would change the sign-up and access experience for families.
The design-defect and failure-to-warn counts treat a chatbot more like a physical product with hazards that needed warning labels. That theory differs from older internet cases that focused on content posted by third parties. If it holds up, it could give other states a template.
Why states are moving faster than Congress
Federal action has moved more slowly. Senate Commerce advanced Sen. Ted Cruz's CHATBOT Act (S. 4407), which would require family accounts and verifiable parental consent for teen chatbot users. The bill has not become law, according to Inside Global Tech's third-quarter update.
Kansas Attorney General Kris Kobach said states "are not going to hold our breath" waiting for federal rules on AI companies. A legal analysis from Troutman Pepper Locke describes the suits as states using existing consumer-protection laws to regulate AI while federal rules are still pending.
States have used litigation against large tech platforms before. Rhode Island's lawsuit against Meta over scam ads and its AI ad tools is one example, as USA 24 reported. For OpenAI, the practical risk is a patchwork. Different state requirements on age verification and data handling could force different product settings by state, and businesses that use ChatGPT in customer-facing or youth-facing products would face their own compliance questions.
Is ChatGPT safe for kids? What parents can do now
The lawsuits do not answer whether ChatGPT is safe for children, and no court has ruled. What they do show is that several state attorneys general want the company's safety claims tested in court. Parents do not have to wait for a verdict to act. These steps are general guidance, not recommendations drawn from the filings:
- Review teen accounts and parental controls in ChatGPT settings, and confirm which account a child uses.
- Keep children from relying on a chatbot for emotional support or health advice, and point them to a parent, doctor or counselor.
- Check what personal data is linked to the account, and remove details that are not needed.
- Talk with kids about the gap between a confident chatbot answer and an accurate one.
Data exposure is a broader concern across AI products. Meta paused sharing for its Muse product after 6,800 shared chat links were exposed, which is a reminder to check what a shared link reveals. Public opinion is also wary, and a USA 24 poll story found most Americans say AI is bad for society.
What comes next for OpenAI and the state cases
Three things bear watching. First, whether more states join the eight already in court, and whether the cases are consolidated. Second, how OpenAI answers the complaints, since its public statements so far emphasize its protections rather than a legal defense. Third, the Texas filing itself. Once its date and court are public, readers can see how closely it tracks the October 14 complaints.
The first court rulings, whether on motions to dismiss or on early requests to change the product, will set the tone. If the CHATBOT Act moves through the Senate, it could set national rules that override or join the state approach. Until then, the company faces a growing set of cases under different state laws.
