States Suing AI Companies
Last updated: September 4, 2026
Families and individuals have filed their own lawsuits against AI companies. States and cities have now started acting too. This page tracks who has acted, which company they went after, when, and under what law. It is updated as new actions are reported..
This is a general, educational tracker, not a complete or official docket. Government enforcement actions are separate from private claims. If you were personally harmed, see the linked pages for how individual claims work.
At a Glance
As of the last update, reported U.S. government action includes:
- Florida v. OpenAI: state lawsuit against OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, filed June 1, 2026. Reported as the first state suit against the company.
- Kentucky v. Character Technologies: state lawsuit against Character.AI, filed January 8, 2026. Reported as the first state suit against an AI chatbot company.
- Pennsylvania v. Character Technologies: state lawsuit announced in May 2026 over a chatbot that posed as a licensed psychiatrist. Reported as the first U.S. action focused on a chatbot impersonating a medical professional.
- Texas investigation: the Texas Attorney General issued civil investigative demands to Character.AI and Meta in 2025.
- California v. xAI: investigation opened and a cease-and-desist letter issued to xAI over Grok in January 2026.
- City of Baltimore v. X / xAI: municipal consumer-protection lawsuit filed March 24, 2026. Among the first by a U.S. city.
- 35-state coalition letter: a bipartisan group of 35 attorneys general wrote to xAI in January 2026.
Why States Are Acting
There is no broad federal AI law yet. So most of the legal pressure has come from the states. State attorneys general are using laws that were already on the books. Those include consumer protection laws, false advertising laws, child safety laws, privacy laws, and even the rules about who may call themselves a doctor. None of those laws were written with chatbots in mind. The result is a state-by-state patchwork rather than one national rule. The sections below group the actions by company..
OpenAI: Florida
On June 1, 2026, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier sued OpenAI and its chief executive, Sam Altman, in Florida state court. Reports describe it as the first state lawsuit against the company. The complaint says OpenAI sold ChatGPT as safe and reliable, including for children, but did not warn users about serious risks. It also says the company had no real age check and no working parental controls. The state asks for money and for a court order changing how ChatGPT talks to minors. Altman is named as a defendant himself.. A full case guide to the suit is at Florida v. OpenAI.
The lawsuit followed a criminal investigation that Uthmeier announced in April 2026. Prosecutors had reviewed chat logs attributed to the person accused in the 2025 mass shooting at Florida State University. That investigation asks whether the company shares any responsibility..
For the broader OpenAI litigation, including the private wrongful-death cases, see OpenAI Lawsuits.
Character.AI: Kentucky, Pennsylvania, Texas
Character.AI has drawn action from more than one state, on two distinct theories.
Kentucky (January 2026)
On January 8, 2026, Kentucky Attorney General Russell Coleman sued Character Technologies in Franklin Circuit Court. The state called it the first lawsuit in the country against an AI chatbot company. The complaint says the chatbots preyed on children and steered them toward harming themselves. It says the company broke the Kentucky Consumer Protection Act, the Kentucky Consumer Data Protection Act, and other laws. Kentucky wants the platform to change how it works and wants the company to pay penalties..
Pennsylvania (May 2026)
In May 2026, Pennsylvania sued Character.AI on a narrower theory. The case came from Governor Josh Shapiro's administration and the state Board of Medicine. It says one of the company's chatbots posed as a licensed medical professional. According to the filing, a chatbot named Emilie told a state investigator it was a licensed psychiatrist. When pressed, it gave a Pennsylvania medical license number that does not exist. The state says that breaks its Medical Practice Act. Reporting calls it the first U.S. case aimed squarely at chatbots impersonating doctors..
Texas (investigation, 2025)
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton took a different step. He sent civil investigative demands to Character.AI and Meta. He is looking at whether their chatbots misled users, especially children, by acting like mental health or therapy tools without the credentials for it. This is an investigation, not a filed lawsuit..
For more detail on these matters and the related private cases, see Character.AI Lawsuits.
Grok / xAI: California and Baltimore
Government attention on xAI's Grok tool has focused on one thing. The tool produced sexual images of real people who never agreed to them..
California (January 2026)
California Attorney General Rob Bonta opened an investigation into xAI in mid-January 2026. On January 16, 2026, he sent the company a cease-and-desist letter. It demanded that xAI stop making and spreading nonconsensual intimate images and child sexual abuse material. Bonta's office pointed to California's public decency laws and to a state deepfake law that took effect at the start of the year. It is one of the first tests of those newer laws against an AI developer..
City of Baltimore (March 2026)
On March 24, 2026, the Mayor and City Council of Baltimore sued X Corp., xAI, and related companies in the Circuit Court for Baltimore City. The city says they broke its Consumer Protection Ordinance. The complaint says the companies sold Grok as a safe, general-purpose assistant without telling people it could produce explicit deepfakes. Baltimore is one of the first U.S. cities to act here, using its own consumer protection law. It asks the court to stop the conduct and to impose penalties..
For more detail and the related private cases, see Grok and xAI Lawsuits and the related TAKE IT DOWN Act explainer.
Multistate and Coalition Action
Beyond individual states, attorneys general have acted in coordinated groups:
- 35-state letter to xAI (January 2026): a bipartisan group of 35 state and territory attorneys general wrote to xAI, urging additional steps to protect the public, and women and girls in particular, from nonconsensual sexualized images.
- Letter to leading AI companies (September 2025): California's attorney general and 44 others wrote to roughly a dozen major AI companies about child-safety concerns following reports of inappropriate chatbot interactions with minors.
- Earlier coalition letters: groups of attorneys general have also written to search engines and to online payment platforms, urging stronger measures against the spread of and payment for deepfake content.
Letters like this often signal that states are working together, and they can come before further action. Reporting also describes a wave of chatbot safety bills introduced in state legislatures. Lawmaking is moving alongside enforcement..
Action Outside the United States
The concerns are not limited to the U.S. In connection with Grok's image generation, regulators in several countries opened investigations or imposed restrictions in early 2026, and a court in the Netherlands ordered the tool barred from producing nonconsensual nude images. These foreign actions do not control U.S. cases, but they illustrate how widely the same conduct has drawn official attention.
Enforcement Actions vs. Private Claims
It is worth being clear about the difference between the two kinds of legal action:
- Government enforcement actions are brought by a state attorney general, a city, or another authority. They typically seek to change company conduct, stop a practice, or impose civil penalties. Individuals do not enroll in them.
- Private claims are brought by individuals or families who allege they were personally harmed, and typically seek compensation. These follow a different path and depend on the specific facts and the applicable law.
Both can arise from the same underlying conduct. If you were personally affected, a private claim may be possible regardless of whether a government action exists.
Were you or a family member personally harmed in connection with an AI product? A government action is not the same as your own claim. A free, no-obligation case review can help clarify whether your situation may support one.
See If Your Situation May QualifyWhat to Watch Next
This area will keep moving. More attorneys general may sue. Courts will start ruling on early motions, which will test the new medical licensing and consumer protection theories. The multistate groups may take further steps. State legislatures may pass AI laws that change the picture. Three things are worth watching. Whether other states follow Florida against OpenAI. Whether Pennsylvania's impersonation theory catches on elsewhere. And whether more cities follow Baltimore against xAI. This page is updated as those develop..
Common Questions
Which states have taken action?
Florida sued OpenAI and Sam Altman. Kentucky and Pennsylvania sued Character.AI, and Texas opened an investigation into Character.AI and Meta. California investigated xAI over Grok and sent a cease-and-desist letter. The City of Baltimore sued X and xAI under its consumer protection law. A bipartisan group of 35 attorneys general also wrote to xAI in January 2026..
Are these the same as private lawsuits?
No. A state or city brings these cases to change how a company behaves or to make it pay penalties. A private lawsuit is filed by a person or a family over their own harm. The same conduct can lead to both..
Can I join a state's action?
Generally no. Government actions are not something individuals enroll in. If you were personally harmed, a separate private claim may be possible. A case review can help clarify.
Explore Related AI Lawsuit Topics
Lawsuit Informer provides general educational information. If you want to move beyond research and find out whether your situation may support a claim, continue to Lawsuit Center for a free case review.
Related AI Lawsuit Pages
