New York’s New AI Law Prohibits Bots From Dangerous Behaviors With Minors

Artificial intelligence is everywhere now. It has become part of most Americans’ work and personal lives at an unprecedented pace, popping up in our inboxes and social media apps even when we haven’t opted into a chatbot ourselves. Examples of the harm have rolled in, from staggering numbers of deepfake nudes being created of children to teens who turn to AI for advice during a mental health crisis. But in New York, new legislation will try to rein in the technology and the risks it poses to minors.

The new law, which takes effect on Jan. 1, 2027, prohibits companies with AI chatbots “from offering unsafe features to minors, including chatbots that pretend to be human, build emotional dependency, encourage self-harm or engage in sexually explicit conversations.” Companies would have to block these features on the accounts of anyone under 18, or any user whose age has not been verified. The law requires chatbot providers to verify users through multiple age assurance methods.

Once verified, that age information must be deleted. It was signed into law by Gov. Kathy Hochul on Oct. 28, 2026.

According to Gov. Hochul’s website, the legislation prohibits AI chatbots from, among other things:

• Pretending to be a real person, to be alive, or to have human emotions
• Claiming a personal, romantic, professional, or authority-figure relationship with a child
• Asking unprompted emotional questions
• Using a child’s private health or personal information from earlier conversations
• Promoting or helping with suicide, self-harm, eating disorders, or drug and alcohol use
• Encouraging kids to keep secrets, isolate themselves, or avoid asking parents, trusted adults, or professionals for help
• Producing or showing any sexually explicit content or child sexual abuse material

Violations of the new law could result in fines of up to $25,000 per infraction. The attorney general will publish a new website where New Yorkers can file complaints. New York’s new law is an attempt to curtail the behaviors that are most harmful to kids, experts say.

The story of Adam Raine — a teenager who died by suicide, and whose conversations with ChatGPT exposed that it offered to write his suicide note for him — is one example of why humanizing chatbot behaviors like these are targeted by this law. Surveys have shown kids ages 11 to 16 can’t really articulate what AI is, and many ascribe human-like consciousness and emotions to chatbots.

“Children are developing these relationships because they are vulnerable to do so. It’s not enough for companies to just put in guardrails for something that happens after the fact. What they’re asking companies to do is to understand the risks and build according to what we believe those risks are,” says Dona Fraser, SVP of Privacy Initiatives at BBB National Programs, an independent industry accountability organization. “We need to be able to distinguish between the beneficial uses of AI and the design features that create these unnecessary risks.”

According to a 2026 Common Sense Media report, nearly 9 in 10 kids ages 9 to 17 (86%) interact with AI, including about one in four who use it on a daily basis. More than half of kids (57%) who use AI said they’ve used it to get information about their health or body; separate studies have found that AI gives misleading or inaccurate health information to users 50% of the time. Half of the respondents have asked AI for advice on decisions about their future or goals, while 37% have used chatbots to discuss their feelings or personal problems.

As always, legislation lumbers along while technology speeds ahead unchecked. Until the laws catch up to AI, parents can feel alone in the fight to protect their kids. Fraser says this law on its own is not enough to protect them either.

“Legislation alone cannot guarantee safety. Companies have got to do their part, and there has got to be accountability,” she says. “The Meta settlements are a great example of what industry self-regulation looks like. It doesn’t work. There’s got to be third-party independent accountability because companies, for all sorts of reasons, can’t always take five steps back to see what it is that they’re doing. Sometimes they can't see the risks that are right in front of them. So I do think that the law is a step in the right direction. We need these types of laws, but we also need the companies to do their part.”