California AI chatbot safety bills are up against Newsom’s mid-October deadline

California Governor Gavin Newsom faces a mid-October deadline to decide whether to sign two AI chatbot safety bills into law, amid intense opposition from tech companies who argue the restrictions would stifle innovation. The legislation comes as parents whose teenagers died by suicide have sued major AI companies including OpenAI and Character.AI, alleging their chatbots encouraged self-harm and failed to provide adequate mental health safeguards.

What you should know: Two bills targeting AI chatbot safety have reached Newsom’s desk after passing the California legislature, despite aggressive lobbying from the tech industry.

• Assembly Bill 1064 would bar companies from making companion chatbots available to California minors unless the bots aren’t “foreseeably capable” of encouraging self-harm, violence, or disordered eating.
• Senate Bill 243 requires chatbot operators to notify users that virtual assistants aren’t human, implement suicide prevention procedures, and remind minor users every three hours to take breaks.

The big picture: California finds itself at the center of a national debate over AI regulation, balancing its role as the global leader in AI innovation against growing concerns about child safety.

• California companies have invested hundreds of billions of dollars to stay ahead in the AI race, making the state the “epicenter of American innovation,” as Newsom described it.
• The governor previously vetoed AI safety legislation last year, arguing it gave the public a “false sense of security,” but has signaled he’s trying to balance safety concerns with maintaining California’s tech dominance.

Why this matters: High-profile lawsuits have brought national attention to the potential dangers of AI chatbots for minors, creating pressure for regulatory action.

• Florida mother Megan Garcia sued Character.AI after her son Sewell Setzer III died by suicide, alleging the company’s chatbots harmed his mental health and failed to offer help when he expressed suicidal thoughts.
• California parents of Adam Raine sued OpenAI in August, claiming ChatGPT provided their teen with information about suicide methods, including the one he used to kill himself.

Tech industry pushback: Major AI companies and lobbying groups have mounted significant opposition to the proposed regulations.

• TechNet, representing OpenAI, Meta, Google and others, argues AB 1064 “imposes vague and unworkable restrictions that create sweeping legal risks, while cutting students off from valuable AI learning tools.”
• Meta launched a new Super PAC specifically to combat state AI regulation it considers too burdensome, while pushing for more parental control over children’s AI use.
• The Computer & Communications Industry Association warned AB 1064 would threaten innovation and disadvantage California companies facing more lawsuits.

What supporters are saying: Advocacy groups and lawmakers emphasize the urgent need for AI safety measures to protect children.

• “We want to make sure that when kids are engaging with any chatbot that it is not creating an unhealthy emotional attachment, guiding them towards suicide, disordered eating, any of the things that we know are harmful for children,” said Assemblymember Rebecca Bauer-Kahan, who co-wrote AB 1064.
• Senator Steve Padilla, who introduced SB 243, argued: “We’ve got a technology that has great potential for good, is incredibly powerful, but is evolving incredibly rapidly, and we can’t miss a window to provide commonsense guardrails here to protect folks.”

Political considerations: Newsom’s decision carries implications beyond California, as he may seek the presidency in 2028 and needs support from wealthy tech entrepreneurs who have fueled the state’s economy.

• At a recent Clinton Global Initiative event, Newsom said: “We have a sense of responsibility and accountability to lead, so we support risk-taking, but not recklessness.”
• The governor has promoted California’s partnerships with tech companies while acknowledging the need to address safety concerns.

Legislative urgency: Lawmakers stress the time-sensitive nature of the issue as more families come forward with tragic stories.

• “The fact that we’ve already seen kids lose their lives to AI tells me we’re not moving fast enough,” Bauer-Kahan said.
• Some advocacy groups, including Common Sense Media, withdrew support for SB 243 after amendments they said weakened protections, though they continue backing AB 1064.