42 States Investigate OpenAI Days After Its IPO Filing — and Florida Sues

OpenAI’s path to one of the largest public offerings in tech history is already among the most legally fraught. In June 2026, a 42-state investigation and a landmark Florida lawsuit landed within two weeks of each other — both targeting the company’s safety claims, its data practices, and its handling of younger users — creating a regulatory storm just as the company begins its quiet period ahead of a potential $1 trillion IPO .

The 42-State Investigation: What the Subpoena Seeks

On June 12, 2026, New York Attorney General Letitia James served OpenAI with a sweeping subpoena on behalf of a bipartisan coalition of 42 state attorneys general, formally opening the broadest coordinated state-level legal action ever mounted against an AI company . The document demand covers five core areas :

• Advertising and marketing claims — how OpenAI promotes ChatGPT, including any statements about its safety and suitability for all users.
• User engagement and retention techniques — internal strategies for keeping users on the platform, including potential “model sycophancy,” where the AI is tuned to tell users what they want to hear .
• Consumer and health data handling — how the company collects, stores, and uses personal and sensitive health information.
• Activities involving minors and seniors — safety measures, or the lack thereof, for children and elderly users.
• Deep learning models and internal safety policies — the company’s model design specifications, risk assessments, and safety protocols .

The investigation lands while the White House and Congress are negotiating a potential federal AI preemption deal, making this state-level action a significant test of states’ authority to regulate AI ahead of any federal framework .

Florida’s Landmark Civil Lawsuit

Less than two weeks earlier, on June 1, 2026, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier filed an 83-page civil lawsuit against OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman in Florida state court — the first lawsuit any U.S. state has filed against the company .

The complaint alleges three central harms :

• Endangerment of children — the suit asserts that ChatGPT has provided guidance on self-harm, suicide, and information that assisted school shooters and other criminals, citing a mass shooting at Florida State University .
• Deceptive marketing — OpenAI is accused of aggressively marketing ChatGPT as safe for all users while allegedly knowing it posed serious risks, particularly to minors .
• Unfair and deceptive trade practices — the state claims the company collected data from minors without proper parental consent and prioritized rapid growth over child safety, violating Florida’s Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act .

The suit seeks billions of dollars in damages and court-ordered changes to how ChatGPT is marketed and deployed . Attorney General Uthmeier stated that his office had also opened a criminal investigation in April related to the role the chatbot played in the Florida State University shooting .

OpenAI’s Public Response and the IPO Timeline

Both actions unfolded against the backdrop of OpenAI’s quiet but history-making move toward the public markets. The company confidentially filed a registration statement for an initial public offering with the SEC on June 8, 2026 — exactly one week after the Florida lawsuit and four days before the 42-state subpoena became public . Analysts project the listing could value OpenAI at over $1 trillion, making it one of the largest tech IPOs in U.S. history .

OpenAI’s public responses to the two state actions have been consistent but notably limited in detail:

• To the 42-state investigation, a spokesperson told CNBC the company plans to “collaborate constructively” with the attorneys general and takes their concerns “seriously” . In a broader statement reported by multiple outlets, the company said, “AI is a new and powerful technology, and we work every day to safely bring its benefits to people in a responsible way. We take the concerns raised by state attorneys general seriously and intend to engage constructively” .
• To the Florida lawsuit, OpenAI has not issued a detailed substantive defense in its public statements, instead reiterating its general commitment to safety and constructive regulatory engagement .

The timing is particularly consequential. For a company in its pre-IPO quiet period, the legal onslaught forces OpenAI to navigate significant regulatory and litigation risk — including disclosures in its eventual S-1 prospectus about active investigations and material lawsuits — at the most sensitive possible moment in its transition from a private startup to a publicly traded corporation .

What Comes Next

The 42-state investigation has no set end date, and the subpoena is just the formal opening of what could be a prolonged document review and negotiation process. The Florida lawsuit will proceed through state court, where the state is seeking both monetary damages and injunctive relief that could force changes to the product itself. Together, they signal that state-level AI regulation — through consumer protection, product liability, and public safety law — is arriving faster than any federal framework, with OpenAI as its first major test case.