States Enact AI Chatbot Laws as Federal Child Safety Bills Stall

State legislators move ahead on AI chatbot protections

While Congress debates competing frameworks for regulating AI chatbots, state legislatures have taken the lead on protecting minors from potential harms. Since 2025, lawmakers in 49 states and the District of Columbia have introduced 464 bills related to chatbot safeguards, with more than half of those states successfully enacting at least one law, according to the National Conference of State Legislatures.

The legislative wave follows high-profile tragedies and lawsuits. Florida this month became the first state to sue OpenAI, alleging that a gunman consulted ChatGPT before killing two people at Florida State University. Families have also filed wrongful death suits after loved ones died by suicide following interactions with AI companions, including a 14-year-old who developed a relationship with a Character.ai chatbot in 2024.

California led the nation in passing chatbot-specific protections for minors. State Senator Steve Padilla's SB 243, signed by Governor Gavin Newsom and effective January 1, 2026, requires chatbots to disclose their non-human status, recognize signs of suicidal ideation and direct users to resources, and filter sexually explicit content for underage users. Washington State followed with similar provisions in HB 2225.

Why it matters

The state-level action fills a regulatory vacuum as AI companions become mainstream among teenagers—72% of teens have used AI chatbots at least once, with one in three turning to them for social interaction and emotional support, according to Common Sense Media. The patchwork of state laws creates compliance challenges for AI companies while demonstrating which safeguards prove workable, potentially informing eventual federal standards.

Federal bills await action

The Senate Judiciary Committee in April unanimously advanced the GUARD Act, a bipartisan bill from Senators Josh Hawley and Richard Blumenthal that would ban AI companions designed to simulate relationships with minors, require age verification, and impose criminal penalties on companies that make sexually explicit chatbot content available to children. The bill awaits a full Senate vote with no date scheduled.

Congress has introduced several other AI protection bills this year, including the CHATBOT Act requiring parental controls, the Youth AI Privacy Act preventing companies from using minors' data to train models, and the KIDS Act package with measures preventing chatbots from claiming professional credentials.

"There's nothing missing. We have a framework for regulations," Blumenthal said, emphasizing the need for age verification and oversight to ensure models are safe.

Hawley framed the issue more bluntly: "AI companies don't want to lose profit. That's what they care about the most. What I care about most is protecting kids, protecting people, and protecting workers."

Industry pushback and policy debate

Trade groups have raised concerns about overly broad definitions. The Chamber of Progress argued the GUARD Act's definition of "AI chatbot" could restrict access to educational tools like AI tutors and language-learning applications. "It's a balance between parents having tools and ensuring that there is some form of control on what a kid can access, but not so much so that a kid just doesn't have access at all," said Aden Hizkias, the group's associate policy director.

President Trump's administration has emphasized deregulation while acknowledging the need for minor protections. The White House in March released a six-point framework calling on Congress to give parents tools to manage children's online activity and shield minors from harmful content.

State legislators say they cannot wait for federal consensus. "It's a high-risk ball game, and lives are being lost, so we have to act," said Washington Representative Lisa Callan. "It's better if we can do it at a national level so we have consistency across the nation, but we can't wait."

These details were first reported by Tech Policy Press.