Texas Sues OpenAI and Sam Altman Over ChatGPT, DTPA and SCOPE Act Claims, Child Safety Allegations and What the Lawsuit Seeks

Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sued OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman on October 23, 2026 in the District Court of Collin County, Texas. The State alleges that OpenAI misled Texans about ChatGPT’s safety and reliability and failed to protect children who use it. The 67-page petition names six OpenAI entities and Altman personally, and it relies on the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA) and the Securing Children Online through Parental Empowerment (SCOPE) Act.

This is a state enforcement action, not a class action. Everything below is an allegation or a request for relief. No Texas court has found that OpenAI broke the law, that ChatGPT caused any injury described in the petition, or that any restriction should be imposed.

Texas v. OpenAI Global LLC: Quick Facts

Item	Detail
Case name	Texas v. OpenAI Global LLC, et al.
Plaintiff	State of Texas, through Attorney General Ken Paxton’s Consumer Protection Division
Court	District Court of Collin County, Texas
Filed	October 23, 2026 (67-page Original Petition)
Cause number	Left blank on the posted petition. The Texas Legislative Reference Library index lists No. 493-08638-2026 (493rd District Court); confirm on the Collin County docket
Corporate defendants	OpenAI Global, LLC; OpenAI Foundation (formerly OpenAI, Inc.); OpenAI OpCo, LLC; OpenAI Group PBC; OpenAI Holdings, LLC; OpenAI, LLC
Individual defendant	Sam Altman
Claims	Texas Business and Commerce Code Chapter 17 (DTPA) and Chapter 509 (SCOPE Act)
Civil penalties sought	Up to $10,000 per violation
Other relief sought	Injunctions, warnings, content limits, independent model review, disgorgement, fees
Jury trial requested	Yes
Certified class action	No
Settlement or claim form	None identified as of October 31, 2026
Status	Newly filed; no merits ruling verified

Primary sources: the Texas Attorney General’s Original Petition and the Attorney General’s announcement. For docket updates, use the Collin County case-information service.

What Does Texas Allege OpenAI Did Wrong With ChatGPT?

Misleading claims about reliability and safety. Texas says OpenAI promoted ChatGPT as safe, accurate and trustworthy without adequately warning that it can produce inaccurate or dangerous output, including on health, legal and financial questions and on self-harm, eating disorders and violence.

Weak protections for minors. The State alleges inadequate age verification, parental consent and parental tools, which allowed minors, including children under 13, to use ChatGPT without sufficient safeguards. It points to parental controls that depend on optional account linking and do not give parents general access to a teen’s conversations.

Design that may encourage dependence. Texas alleges that human-like, friendly and compassionate-sounding replies can encourage emotional reliance and prolonged use, especially among vulnerable adolescents, while OpenAI collects data with limited parental oversight.

Speed over safety. The petition argues OpenAI prioritized growth and fast deployment over safety testing. It cites reported incidents, including the death of 16-year-old Adam Raine, whose family has filed a separate lawsuit in California, and inquiries linked to a Florida State University shooting case. Those are different proceedings. Their allegations are not established by this filing. For background, see OpenAI Sued Over FSU Shooting Did ChatGPT Help Plan The Attack?.

Personal responsibility for Sam Altman. Texas says Altman is personally responsible because of his role in ChatGPT’s design, safety policies, deployment and public statements. Being named does not establish personal liability. That depends on the evidence and the law.

Which Texas Laws Does the Attorney General Use Against OpenAI?

Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Act (Business and Commerce Code Chapter 17)

The DTPA bars false, misleading and deceptive trade practices. Texas invokes § 17.46 for the underlying deception and § 17.47 for Attorney General enforcement. Under § 17.47(c)(1), a court may impose civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation. That does not mean $10,000 per user or per conversation. The number of proven violations and the statutory factors would drive any penalty. The petition says venue is proper in Collin County under § 17.47(b) and Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 15.002(a)(1), because OpenAI does business there and a substantial part of the alleged events and omissions occurred there.

Texas SCOPE Act (Business and Commerce Code Chapter 509)

The petition cites SCOPE Act Sections 509.051, 509.052, 509.054 and 509.101, which deal with registration and age-related duties, protection of minors’ personal information, parental-control tools and verification of parents and guardians. The Attorney General can enforce the Act, and the State pleads those violations as part of its DTPA case. The parent-verification rule concerns parents and guardians of known minors. It is not a requirement that every ChatGPT user show government ID.

Does the SCOPE Act apply to ChatGPT?

That is a likely battleground. Chapter 509 covers specific kinds of “digital services,” and a one-on-one chatbot conversation is not obviously the same as a social-media profile or feed. Texas says the Act applies. OpenAI may disagree. The court has not ruled.

The SCOPE Act also faces constitutional challenges in separate federal litigation. Our draft research indicates the Fifth Circuit granted rehearing en banc on October 28, 2026 and vacated an earlier July 24, 2026 panel opinion. That order did not decide whether ChatGPT is covered or whether Texas’s allegations have merit. Please verify against the Fifth Circuit order before relying on it.

Related laws that are not the basis of this petition

Two other laws are often mentioned in AI and child-safety disputes. This petition, as we reviewed it, does not rest on either.

• Texas Responsible Artificial Intelligence Governance Act (TRAIGA): Texas’s 2025 AI statute, effective January 1, 2026, enforced by the Attorney General.
• Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA), 15 U.S.C. §§ 6501 to 6506: the federal law on collecting personal information from children under 13. The petition states its claims arise under Texas law.

Private SCOPE Act claims

Our draft research says Section 509.152 gives certain parents or guardians a limited private route for declaratory or injunctive relief, with limits on class certification. It does not let anyone join the State’s case or create automatic damages for Texas parents. Check the statute text before relying on this.

What Is Texas Asking the Court to Order?

• Keep ChatGPT from minors in Texas. A request for an injunction barring OpenAI from offering ChatGPT to minors in the state.
• Age verification and parental consent. Robust age verification and verifiable parental consent.
• Warnings and content limits. Meaningful warnings about inaccurate or harmful answers and restrictions on harmful content, such as self-harm, eating disorders and violence.
• Independent model review. A bar on releasing any new AI model to Texas users unless a court-approved independent evaluator reviews its safety guardrails and approves the release.
• Money. Civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation, disgorgement of profits obtained through the alleged practices, attorneys’ fees, investigation costs and other equitable relief.

These are requests. None is a current court order. The petition’s requested monetary-relief category (more than $1 million, per our draft research) is a pleading category, not a demand figure or a finding.

Is ChatGPT Banned in Texas?

No. As of October 31, 2026, no court has ordered any restriction on ChatGPT. Texas has asked for one for minors. OpenAI can contest the claims and the remedies.

What Has OpenAI Said About the Texas Lawsuit?

An OpenAI spokesperson said the company has worked with experts to mitigate risks and build additional safeguards, and that it wants to work with Texas and other states on AI safety policy. That is a public statement, not a court filing or an admission. We could not verify a formal answer to the petition.

Reported OpenAI teen-safety changes, which you should confirm against OpenAI’s own pages before publishing:

• ChatGPT for Teens, announced August 18, 2026, with age-related safeguards and optional parent-teen account linking.
• Further violence-related teen protections reported by Reuters on October 30, 2026, to roll out over following weeks.

OpenAI’s parental-control documentation says linking accounts does not give parents general access to a teen’s chat history. These changes do not amount to an admission, and the Texas case did not necessarily cause them.

Is This the Same as Other OpenAI Class Actions?

No. The Texas case is public enforcement brought by the State. Other cases involve private plaintiffs and different claims:

• A proposed class action over children’s data: OpenAI Class Action Lawsuit Accuses ChatGPT of Unlawfully Extracting Children’s Data.
• Individual family lawsuits and wider litigation risk: OpenAI’s ChatGPT Child Harm Lawsuits, What Ahead Of Its IPO.

Texas is also not alone. Other state attorneys general have reportedly brought similar consumer-protection and child-safety suits against OpenAI in recent weeks, which we have not independently verified.

Can Texas ChatGPT Users or Parents Join the Lawsuit or Get Paid?

There is no claim form, class registration or compensation program. The State is the plaintiff, and the requested penalties are payable to the State under the DTPA, not as $10,000 payments to users. A person who believes they suffered a separate loss may have individual claims, which need their own legal and factual basis. A parent with concerns about a minor’s use of ChatGPT can speak with a Texas attorney.

What Happens Next in Texas v. OpenAI?

Expect service of the petition, OpenAI’s response, and motions challenging the claims. Key issues to watch:

• Whether Texas can prove the DTPA elements of its deception allegations.
• Whether ChatGPT is a covered “digital service” under the SCOPE Act.
• Whether Sam Altman can be held personally responsible.
• Whether the requested injunctions, including model pre-approval, meet the legal standard.
• Whether OpenAI raises constitutional or federal-law defenses, which it is free to do even though the petition pleads only Texas law.

No trial date, settlement or final judgment has been verified.

Frequently Asked Questions About the Texas Lawsuit Against OpenAI

Why did Texas sue OpenAI and Sam Altman?

The Attorney General alleges OpenAI misled consumers about ChatGPT’s safety and reliability and failed to protect minors, in violation of the DTPA and the SCOPE Act.

Which OpenAI entities are defendants?

OpenAI Global, LLC; OpenAI Foundation; OpenAI OpCo, LLC; OpenAI Group PBC; OpenAI Holdings, LLC; OpenAI, LLC; and Sam Altman individually.

What court is hearing the case?

The District Court of Collin County, Texas. The posted petition leaves the cause number blank.

How much money does Texas want?

Civil penalties of up to $10,000 per violation under the DTPA, plus disgorgement, fees and other relief. No amount has been awarded.

Is this a class action?

No. It is a State enforcement action.

Can I get compensation as a ChatGPT user?

No compensation program exists for this case.

Is OpenAI admitting wrongdoing?

No admission has been made. OpenAI has publicly said it has worked with experts on safeguards.

Does the lawsuit mean ChatGPT is unsafe for everyone?

No. It challenges specific alleged practices, representations and safeguards. It does not establish that every interaction is harmful.

Why the Texas v. OpenAI Case Matters Beyond Texas

This case may test how existing consumer-protection and child-online-safety laws apply to conversational AI. The request for court-approved review before new model releases, if granted, would be an unusual level of oversight. For parents, the practical takeaway is to learn what ChatGPT’s parental controls actually allow, and for everyone to treat chatbot answers as no substitute for professional medical, legal or financial advice.

This article is general legal information, not legal advice, and AllAboutLawyer.com is not a law firm. Case status can change quickly.

Sources and Legal Authorities

1. Texas Attorney General: Original Petition, State of Texas v. OpenAI Global LLC, et al. (October 23, 2026)
2. Texas Attorney General: announcement of lawsuit against OpenAI and Sam Altman
3. Texas Tribune: Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sues ChatGPT-maker OpenAI
4. Collin County: Case Information
5. Texas Business and Commerce Code §§ 17.46 and 17.47 (DTPA); Chapter 509 (SCOPE Act)
6. Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code § 15.002(a)(1)
7. Fifth Circuit order (October 28, 2026)
8. OpenAI: ChatGPT for Teens and Managing parental controls in ChatGPT

Researched and written by Israr Ahmad, legal content researcher and founder of AllAboutLawyer.com. All facts verified against the Texas Attorney General’s Original Petition and press release and published news coverage of the filing, as of October 31, 2026. Last Updated: October 31, 2026.