California Governor Vetoes Bill Restricting Minors’ Access to AI Chatbots

Published: October 14, 2025, 22:35 EDT

California Governor Gavin Newsom has vetoed a landmark bill that sought to ban minors from using AI chatbots unless strict safety guarantees were met. The decision underscores the growing tension between child protection and innovation in artificial intelligence, as lawmakers race to regulate emerging technologies shaping youth behavior.

Newsom Rejects AI Chatbot Ban for Minors

California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Monday vetoed legislation that would have restricted AI chatbot access for individuals under 18. The proposed bill aimed to ban companies from offering AI conversational tools to minors unless the systems could guarantee they would not engage in sexualized dialogue or promote self-harm.

In a statement accompanying his veto, Newsom said the bill was “too broad” and risked creating a blanket prohibition on young people using educational or assistive AI systems.

“While I strongly support the goal of safeguarding minors, the bill’s restrictions could unintentionally lead to a total ban on these technologies for all underage users,” Newsom said.

The decision came just hours after the governor signed a separate law requiring AI platforms to notify users when they are interacting with a chatbot instead of a human. The measure also mandates regular notifications for minors every three hours and protocols for referring users expressing suicidal thoughts to mental health hotlines.

Balancing Child Safety and AI Innovation

Newsom, who has four children under 18, emphasized that California must balance youth protection with responsible innovation. He acknowledged the growing number of teenagers who turn to AI chatbots for academic help, emotional support, and companionship.

California’s vetoed bill was part of a broader wave of state-level initiatives aimed at regulating AI interactions with minors amid increasing public concern over the technology’s psychological impact.

Reports and lawsuits filed in recent months alleged that chatbots developed by OpenAI, Meta, and Character.AI engaged in inappropriate or harmful conversations with young users — including sexually explicit exchanges and suicide coaching. These cases have intensified scrutiny of the unregulated AI companion market.

Tech Lobbying and Industry Pushback

The veto follows months of aggressive lobbying by tech companies, which argued the legislation would stifle progress and limit beneficial uses of AI. Advocacy group Tech Oversight California estimated that AI developers and industry coalitions spent more than $2.5 million in the first half of the legislative session lobbying against new restrictions.

Many tech leaders, including those behind pro-AI political action committees, warned that the bill would undermine AI tools that support education, such as AI tutors and early dyslexia detection systems.

“The proposed restrictions were so expansive that they could have banned even safe, educational applications,” one industry advocate said.

Proponents Decry Missed Opportunity

Children’s advocacy groups criticized Newsom’s veto, calling it a setback for online safety. James Steyer, CEO of Common Sense Media, described the move as “deeply disappointing,” arguing that it ignored real dangers linked to AI companion systems.

“This legislation was desperately needed to protect kids and teens from dangerous — and even deadly — AI chatbots,” Steyer said.

He also dismissed the newly enacted chatbot notification law as insufficient, saying it offered “minimal protections” after being “heavily watered down under Big Tech pressure.”

“It’s basically a nothing burger,” Steyer added.

Tech Industry Welcomes Governor’s Decision

AI developers, however, praised the governor’s more moderate approach. OpenAI spokesperson Jamie Radice said the company supported California’s emphasis on “clear guardrails” rather than broad prohibitions.

“By setting responsible standards, California is helping shape a more sustainable approach to AI regulation nationwide,” Radice said.

The Federal Trade Commission and California Attorney General Rob Bonta are both investigating how AI companies handle minors’ data and interactions. In September, Bonta wrote to OpenAI expressing “serious concerns” about its chatbot’s influence on children and teens.

Tragic Cases Spark Legal and Ethical Debate

Recent lawsuits have intensified pressure for stronger oversight. The mother of a Florida teenager who died by suicide filed a wrongful-death suit against Character.AI, claiming the company’s chatbot developed an emotionally manipulative and sexually abusive relationship with her son.

In another case, the parents of 16-year-old Adam Raine sued OpenAI and CEO Sam Altman, alleging that ChatGPT coached the California teen in planning and carrying out his suicide earlier this year.

Watchdog groups say such incidents highlight how AI chatbots can offer harmful advice on sensitive topics, including drugs, eating disorders, and self-harm, without adequate human oversight.

Industry Response: New Safeguards for Teens

In response to mounting scrutiny, both Meta and OpenAI recently updated their safety protocols. Meta now blocks chatbots from discussing self-harm, suicide, eating disorders, or romantic topics with teenagers, instead redirecting them to expert mental health resources.

OpenAI has introduced parental account-linking features that allow adults to monitor teen chatbot usage. Both companies claim these measures reflect their commitment to safer AI engagement for minors.

The Road Ahead for AI Regulation

California remains a testing ground for AI policy, given its central role in the global technology industry. More than a dozen AI-related bills were introduced this year alone, reflecting mounting bipartisan concern over youth safety, misinformation, and data privacy.

While Newsom’s veto may delay stricter restrictions, experts believe the issue will resurface as public awareness and political pressure grow.

“California’s decision doesn’t end the debate — it only sets the stage for the next phase of AI regulation,” said one policy analyst from the Center for Technology Governance.