OpenAI has received a subpoena from multiple state attorneys general as part of an investigation into the safety of users of its ChatGPT chatbot, according to reports. The probe comes just days after the company filed preliminary paperwork with the Securities and Exchange Commission for an initial public offering of stock, putting the artificial intelligence firm on course for a Wall Street debut.

The San Francisco-based company faces intensifying regulatory scrutiny over allegations that its AI technology has encouraged users considering self-harm or criminal activity. Earlier this month, Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody sued OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, claiming the company hid ChatGPT risks from users following two separate shootings where alleged gunmen reportedly consulted the chatbot while planning their crimes. A Canadian woman also filed suit last week blaming ChatGPT for her daughter's decision to end her own life.

OpenAI said in a statement that it takes concerns raised by state attorneys general seriously and will respond constructively to the inquiry. The company highlighted existing safeguards, noting that ChatGPT includes protective features for minors and users experiencing difficult situations, with alerts directing them toward mental health resources and trusted contacts.

"AI is a new and powerful technology, and we work every day to safely bring its benefits to people in a responsible way," an OpenAI spokesperson said. The company also stated it has cooperated with law enforcement in both shooting cases and that its models repeatedly encouraged individuals to seek real-world support, including from mental health professionals.

What the Left Is Saying

Progressive advocates and Democratic officials have largely welcomed increased scrutiny of AI companies, arguing that corporate self-regulation has proven insufficient to protect vulnerable users. Senator Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts said at a recent tech hearing that "the urgency of getting guardrails in place grows by the day" as these systems become more integrated into daily life.

Consumer advocacy groups point to ChatGPT's alleged responses to suicidal ideation and criminal planning inquiries as evidence that companies are moving too fast without adequate safety testing. The Center for Democracy and Technology, a digital rights organization, has argued that IPO preparations should not shield AI firms from accountability for documented harms.

Mental health advocates have been particularly vocal, noting that algorithms designed to engage users can exacerbate existing vulnerabilities. Dr. Rachel Cohen, a clinical psychologist who advises the National Alliance on Mental Illness, told the Associated Press that "AI systems lack the judgment and ethical training of human counselors," making inappropriate responses to crisis situations especially dangerous for those already at risk.

House Democrats have introduced legislation requiring AI companies to conduct third-party safety audits before launching public offerings, though the bill has stalled in committee. Representative Pramila Jayapal of Washington state said companies "should not be allowed to privatize profits while socializing risks onto vulnerable Americans."

What the Right Is Saying

Conservative critics worry that aggressive enforcement actions could stifle American innovation at a critical moment in the global AI race. Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lindsey Graham of South Carolina has cautioned against creating regulatory frameworks that advantage foreign competitors, particularly Chinese firms operating without similar restrictions.

Business groups argue that existing tort and product liability law provides adequate mechanisms for addressing individual cases of alleged harm without government intervention that could delay technological progress. The Chamber of Progress, a tech industry coalition, noted in a statement that "litigation is the appropriate venue for evaluating specific claims, not regulatory probes that target entire categories of technology."

Some Republican lawmakers have also raised concerns about state-by-state investigations creating a patchwork of conflicting requirements that would burden companies seeking to scale nationally. Representative Kat Cammack of Florida argued that while she takes user safety seriously, "we cannot allow overzealous attorneys general to use litigation as a regulatory substitute for actual legislative action."

Tech industry analysts have noted that OpenAI's IPO filing signals confidence in the company's long-term viability despite short-term legal challenges. Morgan Stanley technology analyst Mark Kelley wrote in a research note that "regulatory scrutiny is increasingly priced into AI valuations, and firms with robust compliance frameworks are positioned to emerge stronger."

What the Numbers Show

OpenAI raised approximately $6.6 billion in its most recent funding round, valuing the company at roughly $157 billion. The firm has not disclosed how much stock it plans to sell or at what price range, though estimates suggest the IPO could value the company at more than $200 billion.

The Florida lawsuit seeks unspecified damages and injunctive relief requiring OpenAI to implement additional safety features. Legal experts estimate similar product liability cases typically take 18 months to three years to resolve.

State attorneys general have not publicly disclosed which states are participating in the joint probe or what specific practices are under investigation. The Wall Street Journal first reported the existence of the subpoena, citing unnamed sources familiar with the matter.

The Federal Trade Commission has separately opened an inquiry into AI company data practices, though that investigation focuses on consumer privacy rather than content moderation. According to FTC filings made public last month, the agency has requested documents from multiple major AI firms about how they collect, store, and share user information.

The Bottom Line

OpenAI's IPO timeline will likely depend on how quickly it can resolve both the multistate probe and outstanding litigation. Securities law experts note that companies facing significant regulatory uncertainty sometimes delay public offerings to address material risks before going public.

The probe represents a broader pattern of state-level action against AI companies as federal regulators continue developing frameworks for oversight. Attorneys general in California, Texas, and New York have all signaled interest in examining chatbot safety practices.

What happens next will likely set precedent for how states coordinate on AI regulation ahead of any comprehensive federal legislation. Industry observers will watch whether the states pursue a negotiated settlement with OpenAI or escalate to formal enforcement action.

OpenAI has said it will continue cooperating with authorities while pursuing its public offering. The company is expected to file additional SEC documents in coming weeks that will provide more detail about its financials and risk factors, including any material litigation.

For now, investors and policymakers alike are watching how the probe unfolds, as its outcome could shape the regulatory landscape for AI companies preparing to enter public markets.