OpenAI Faces Allegations That It Failed to Act Before Deadly Shooting in 30 New Lawsuits
OpenAI is facing a new wave of litigation tied to the deadly Tumbler Ridge school shooting in British Columbia, with plaintiffs’ lawyers filing 30 additional lawsuits that expand the allegations against the ChatGPT maker.
The new complaints, filed Tuesday in California, accuse OpenAI not only of failing to intervene before the February attack but, for the first time, of aiding and abetting the shooting — a significantly more serious legal theory that requires plaintiffs to establish intentional conduct, TechCrunch reported.
Benzinga contacted OpenAI for comment. A spokesperson referred the publication to a post on X from Jason Kwon, OpenAI’s chief strategy officer.
"There isn’t a day that goes by that I don’t think about what happened at Tumbler Ridge, or the victims of this devastating tragedy and their families," Kwon said.
The shooter, identified as 18-year-old Jesse Van Rootselaar, carried out a mass shooting at Tumbler Ridge Secondary School. Eight people died, including Van Rootselaar’s mother and stepbrother before the school attack and six people at the school. Five of the victims were children. More than two dozen additional people were injured.
Van Rootselaar was found dead at the scene from what investigators believe was a self-inflicted gunshot wound.
OpenAI employees flagged the shooter’s account eight months before the attack and concluded it represented "a credible and specific threat of gun violence against real people," the April lawsuit stated.
Employees reportedly pushed leadership to notify Canadian authorities, but OpenAI instead terminated Van Rootselaar’s account. She later created another account, according to the report.
OpenAI has defended its decision, saying Van Rootselaar’s activity did not meet the company’s internal standard for alerting law enforcement, which it describes as an "imminent and credible risk" of serious physical harm.
Kwon said OpenAI’s Intelligence & Investigations team and Legal department are responsible for setting standards around when cases should be reported to law enforcement.
"They use automated systems that leave the toughest calls to human judgment, but within standards to minimize discretion and produce principled decisions that strive to balance security and privacy," Kwon said.
He acknowledged that the judgment involved in such decisions "is not infallible," but said the process is designed to balance public safety with the privacy and security of OpenAI’s users.
Lawsuits Point to OpenAI Executives
The new complaints name OpenAI Chief Global Affairs Officer Chris Lehane as the executive who allegedly instructed employees not to contact authorities. Lehane is not named as a defendant. CEO Sam Altman, however, is listed as a defendant in the new complaints, as he was in the earlier lawsuits.
Kwon directly disputed the allegations involving Lehane, saying it was "absolutely false" that Lehane was involved in OpenAI’s original referral decision or that the company’s investigators report to him.
Kwon also rejected claims that "political" or public-relations considerations influenced the company’s handling of the case.
"The people at the center of these challenging decisions do not prioritize safety" is "completely untrue," Kwon said, adding that OpenAI has been approaching the litigation with respect for the legal process and the families and victims of the tragedy.
The new complaints also seek to undermine OpenAI’s explanation that Van Rootselaar’s activity did not present an imminent enough threat to justify contacting police.
One filing points to a November 2025 incident involving an alleged threat from an activist against OpenAI’s San Francisco offices. The complaint argues that OpenAI responded aggressively even though the company had acknowledged there was "no indication of active threat activity."
The lawsuit alleges that OpenAI nevertheless locked down its offices, warned employees, circulated the suspect’s name and photograph and contacted the San Francisco Police Department. Plaintiffs argue that the incident shows OpenAI applied a different standard when its own employees were potentially at risk.
Photo: Shutterstock