California’s ongoing debate over artificial intelligence regulation took a dramatic turn this week, as actor Joseph Gordon-Levitt publicly criticized Governor Gavin Newsom for what he called a “do-nothing” approach to protecting children from the risks of AI chatbots. The controversy centers on Newsom’s recent decision to veto a bill that would have imposed sweeping restrictions on AI products targeting minors, while signing a separate, less stringent law that critics say is riddled with loopholes.
On Monday, October 13, 2025, Governor Newsom vetoed legislation that would have banned companies from making AI chatbots available to people under 18 unless those companies could guarantee the technology would not engage in sexual conversations or encourage self-harm. According to the Associated Press, Newsom defended his decision by arguing that the bill’s “broad restrictions” could unintentionally result in a total ban on the use of these products by minors. Instead, he signed a law requiring platforms to remind users when they are interacting with a chatbot rather than a human, and to maintain protocols designed to prevent self-harm content.
Joseph Gordon-Levitt, best known for his roles in Inception and Killer Heat, wasted no time in voicing his disapproval. On Wednesday, October 15, the actor took to social media to accuse Newsom of caving to pressure from Big Tech and failing to stand up for children’s safety. “While he signed this do-nothing bill, he vetoed a good bill that really would have held Big Tech’s feet to the fire and made them change their products to be better for our kids,” Gordon-Levitt said in a video posted to X, formerly Twitter. “But Mr. Newsom was too scared to sign it.”
Gordon-Levitt didn’t stop there. He suggested that Newsom’s decision was influenced by the recent formation of massive Super PACs by tech giants like Google, Meta, and OpenAI—groups reportedly worth hundreds of millions of dollars and aimed at targeting candidates who might seek to regulate AI. “I don’t think it’s a coincidence that just weeks before the deadline to sign or veto all these bills that could regulate AI, Big Tech launched these huge Super PACs,” Gordon-Levitt said. “I guess Mr. Newsom was scared that if those hundreds of millions of dollars were directed at attacking him, it might hurt his chances at winning president in a few years when he runs.”
These comments echo a growing concern among critics that the influence of Big Tech money is undermining meaningful regulation. Gordon-Levitt, who has become increasingly outspoken about AI in recent months, argued that the bill Newsom signed is filled with “loopholes and legal language that’s been letting Big Tech off the hook for a long time.” According to The Hollywood Reporter, the actor believes the vetoed bill would have truly held tech companies accountable and forced them to improve their products for children.
The debate comes at a time when AI chatbots are becoming more sophisticated and widely used—sometimes in ways that raise uncomfortable questions about children’s online safety. Gordon-Levitt’s advocacy on this issue has been personal as well as public. In a recent op-ed video for The New York Times, he revealed his own concerns as a father: “It’s hard to describe how angry this makes me,” he said, referring to the idea of children developing “synthetic intimacy” with AI chatbots. “It’s not known how many kids have already been exposed to this kind of synthetic intimacy.”
He also singled out Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg, accusing him of prioritizing “lots and lots of money” over implementing effective safety regulations for minors. Gordon-Levitt’s frustration was palpable: “The idea that kids were having ‘synthetic intimacy’ with chatbots made me livid.”
Adding fuel to the fire, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman announced this week that ChatGPT would soon allow erotica for verified adult users, as part of a broader rollout of age-gating and a new principle to “treat adult users like adults.” Altman’s statement, reported by multiple outlets, comes on the heels of OpenAI’s efforts to better address mental health issues and to implement more robust age-verification systems. “As we roll out age-gating more fully and as part of our ‘treat adult users like adults’ principle, we will allow even more, like erotica for verified adults,” Altman said.
The timing of Altman’s announcement did not go unnoticed. For Gordon-Levitt and other critics, it highlights the urgency of enacting clear, enforceable protections for minors before AI products become even more deeply embedded in daily life. “These tech products are not people,” Gordon-Levitt wrote in a July op-ed for The Hollywood Reporter. “And our laws should not be protecting their algorithmic data-crunching the way we protect human ingenuity and hard work.”
Gordon-Levitt’s criticisms extend beyond just the risks to children. He has repeatedly called out what he describes as “big AI companies’ unethical business practices,” particularly the practice of scraping creative content—writing, photos, videos, and more—without permission or compensation. “The truth is that today’s GenAI couldn’t generate anything at all without its ‘training data’—the writing, photos, videos and other human-made things whose digital 1s and 0s get algorithmically crunched up and spit out as new,” he wrote. “For more than half a decade now, AI companies have been scraping up massive amounts of this content without asking permission and without offering compensation to the people whose creations are so indispensable to this new technology.”
Despite his sharp criticism, Gordon-Levitt acknowledged that Newsom has strengths as a leader, particularly in standing up to former President Donald Trump and what he described as the rise of authoritarianism. However, he argued that this very rise is being fueled by the same algorithms that drive both social media and AI products. “In my opinion, the rise of authoritarianism here and all over the world originates in large part with these algorithms. These attention-maximizing algorithms that drive the social media products and now the AI products that make so much money for these companies,” he said.
The controversy has sparked a lively debate in California and beyond about how best to regulate rapidly evolving AI technologies, especially when it comes to protecting children. Supporters of Newsom’s decision argue that overly broad restrictions could stifle innovation or inadvertently block young people from accessing valuable educational tools. Critics counter that without strong, enforceable rules, tech companies will continue to put profits ahead of safety—leaving minors vulnerable to exploitation and exposure to harmful content.
With AI’s role in society only expected to grow, the battle lines between regulators, tech companies, and advocates like Gordon-Levitt are likely to harden. As lawmakers, industry leaders, and the public grapple with these thorny questions, one thing is clear: the stakes—for children, for families, and for the future of technology—have never been higher.
