California SB 243: The Companion Chatbot Law Explained

Status at a glance

Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 243 on October 13, 2025, and it took effect January 1, 2026 (Senator Padilla's office; Gunderson Dettmer). The disclosure, safety protocol and minor safeguards apply now. The annual report to the California Department of Public Health's Office of Suicide Prevention is due starting July 1, 2027.

The law has already been revised once. On September 10, 2026, Newsom signed SB 1119, known as Adam's Law, which repeals SB 243's minor-specific provisions and replaces them with broader child safety rules whose core duties begin July 1, 2027 (ZwillGen; Common Sense Media). Until then, SB 243 as enacted governs. As of November 9, 2026, we found no reported court decision applying SB 243.

Date	What applies
Jan. 1, 2026	AI notice, suitability warning, suicide and self-harm protocols, crisis referrals, minor safeguards, private right of action
Jan. 1, 2027	SB 1119 (Adam's Law) takes effect, including age assurance
July 1, 2027	First annual SB 243 report to the Office of Suicide Prevention; SB 1119 child safety duties replace SB 243's minor provisions

What is California SB 243?

SB 243 is California's companion chatbot law. Senator Steve Padilla introduced it after the death of 14-year-old Sewell Setzer III in Florida, whose mother, Megan Garcia, testified for the bill and sued the company behind the chatbot her son used (Padilla press release). The law adds a new chapter to the Business and Professions Code beginning at Section 22601 and is Chapter 677 of the Statutes of 2025 (LegiScan chaptered text).

It combines three tools: notices to users, mandatory safety protocols, and extra safeguards when the operator knows a user is a minor. The Future of Privacy Forum describes it as the first enacted chatbot law with protections tailored to minors, following New York's AI companion law, which was enacted earlier in 2025 (FPF). An earlier draft required third-party audits, but that provision was removed before enactment. On the day he signed SB 243, Newsom vetoed AB 1064, a stricter bill that would have barred making companion chatbots available to minors unless they were not foreseeably capable of encouraging self-harm (same source).

SB 243 sits alongside California's other AI statutes, including SB 53 on frontier models; see our overview of California AI laws and our page on SB 53.

Which chatbots count as companion chatbots?

A companion chatbot is an AI system with a natural language interface that gives adaptive, human-like responses to user inputs and is capable of meeting a user's social needs, including by exhibiting anthropomorphic features and being able to sustain a relationship across multiple interactions. An operator is a person who makes a companion chatbot platform available to a user in California (Gunderson Dettmer).

Three kinds of bot are excluded:

• bots used only for customer service, business operations, productivity and analysis of source information, internal research or technical assistance;
• bots inside video games that are limited to game-related replies and cannot discuss mental health, self-harm or sexually explicit conduct, or hold a dialogue on unrelated topics; and
• stand-alone consumer devices that work as speakers and voice-activated assistants and do not sustain a relationship or generate outputs likely to elicit emotional responses.

The test is about capability, not marketing. Gunderson Dettmer reads the definition to reach some customer service bots that remember users and build rapport, wellness coaches and study companions, not only apps sold as AI friends or partners. Liability also stays with the operator: a company that builds a companion product on a third-party model is responsible for compliance and cannot hand it to the model vendor (same source).

What does SB 243 require operators to do?

For all users

• AI notice. If a reasonable person interacting with the chatbot could be misled into thinking they are talking to a human, the operator must give a clear and conspicuous notice that the chatbot is artificially generated and not human.
• Suitability warning. The operator must disclose, on the app, the browser or any other access point, that companion chatbots may not be suitable for some minors.
• Suicide and self-harm protocol. A companion chatbot may not engage with users unless the operator maintains a protocol to prevent the production of suicidal ideation, suicide or self-harm content, including a notice referring a user who expresses suicidal ideation or self-harm to crisis service providers such as a suicide hotline or crisis text line. The operator must publish details of the protocol on its website.

These duties are summarized from Gunderson Dettmer's analysis. The law directs operators to use evidence-based methods to measure suicidal ideation but does not define either term, which leaves room for dispute over what a compliant detection method is (FPF).

For users the operator knows are minors

• disclose that the user is interacting with AI;
• by default, remind the user at least every three hours during a continuing interaction to take a break and that the chatbot is AI; and
• take reasonable measures to stop the chatbot from producing sexually explicit visual material or directly stating that the minor should engage in sexually explicit conduct.

Annual report

From July 1, 2027, operators must report each year to the Office of Suicide Prevention the number of crisis service referrals issued in the previous calendar year, the protocols used to detect, remove and respond to suicidal ideation by users, and the protocols that bar the chatbot from responding about suicidal ideation or actions (Gunderson Dettmer). The report may not include users' personal information (FPF).

When does California SB 243 take effect?

SB 243 took effect January 1, 2026, the default start date for California statutes enacted in 2025. Every duty described above, other than the annual report, has applied since then. The first report to the Office of Suicide Prevention is due under the July 1, 2027 start date for reporting (Gunderson Dettmer).

Two 2026 laws change the picture for minors. SB 1119 takes effect January 1, 2027, with most new obligations from July 1, 2027. It requires operators either to determine each user's age or to apply child protections to everyone, and replaces SB 243's three minor safeguards with pre-release risk assessments, crisis protocols that can notify a linked parent or connect a child to 988, default limits of one hour per session and two hours per day, parental controls, restrictions on romantic and sycophantic behavior, limits on advertising and data sales, and independent audits from January 1, 2029 (ZwillGen). SB 867 separately bars the sale of toys with embedded companion chatbots until January 1, 2031 (California Lawyers Association).

One follow-up failed. Padilla's SB 300, which would have required operators to prevent any sexually explicit material in conversations with minors, passed the Senate 38 to 0 in January 2026 (Padilla press release) but did not pass the Legislature (California Lawyers Association).

Can you sue under SB 243? Private right of action and penalties

Yes. SB 243 gives a private right of action to any person who suffers injury in fact as a result of a violation. A plaintiff may seek injunctive relief, damages equal to the greater of actual damages or $1,000 per violation, and reasonable attorney fees and costs (Gunderson Dettmer). The law states that its duties are cumulative and do not relieve operators of obligations under other laws, so it adds to, rather than replaces, existing claims such as negligence or unfair competition.

The private right of action is what sets SB 243 apart from New York's AI companion law, which only the Attorney General can enforce, with civil penalties of up to $15,000 per day (Morrison Foerster). The per-violation floor makes counting important: how courts will count violations, for example per conversation, per missed reminder or per user, has not been decided. The private right of action survives SB 1119, which adds its own narrower action for children who suffer actual harm (ZwillGen).

How it compares

Feature	California SB 243	New York GBL Article 47	Federal GUARD Act (bill)
Status	In force Jan. 1, 2026	In force Nov. 5, 2025	Pending in the Senate
AI notice	Where a reasonable person could be misled; every 3 hours for known minors	At the start and at least every 3 hours	See our GUARD Act page
Crisis protocol	Required and published	Required	See our GUARD Act page
Enforcement	Private suits, $1,000 minimum per violation	Attorney General, up to $15,000 per day	Not law

The New York column draws on FPF and Morrison Foerster. The federal GUARD Act would go further, banning AI companions for minors.

Does SB 243 apply to general purpose chatbots?

Possibly. Nothing in SB 243 limits it to products sold as companions. The definition turns on whether a system gives adaptive, human-like responses and is capable of meeting a user's social needs while sustaining a relationship across interactions. ZwillGen, analyzing the identical definition carried into SB 1119, reads it to capture some general purpose chatbots with memory of past conversations (ZwillGen). The Future of Privacy Forum flags the same uncertainty, noting that whether repeated customer interactions count as a sustained relationship is open (FPF).

No court has ruled on the scope question as of November 9, 2026. The cases that prompted the law, including the suits against Character.AI tracked on our planned Character.AI lawsuits page, involved apps built around personas, but a general assistant with memory, a persistent name and a warm conversational style is closer to the line than its maker might assume.

What changed

• 2026-11-13: Page published, with status verified as of November 9, 2026.
• 2026-09-10: SB 1119 (Adam's Law) signed; it will replace SB 243's minor-specific provisions from July 1, 2027.
• 2026-01-26: Follow-up bill SB 300 passed the Senate 38 to 0; it later failed in the Legislature.
• 2026-01-01: SB 243 took effect.
• 2025-10-13: Governor Newsom signed SB 243 and vetoed AB 1064.

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 243 require?

Companion chatbot operators must notify users that the chatbot is AI where a reasonable person could be misled, warn that companion chatbots may not suit some minors, maintain and publish suicide and self-harm protocols with crisis referrals, add break reminders and sexual content limits for known minors, and report annually from July 1, 2027.

When does California SB 243 take effect?

It took effect January 1, 2026. Annual reporting to the Office of Suicide Prevention begins July 1, 2027. From that date, SB 1119 (Adam's Law) replaces SB 243's minor-specific provisions with broader child safety duties.

Can you sue under SB 243?

Yes. A person who suffers injury in fact from a violation can sue for injunctive relief, the greater of actual damages or $1,000 per violation, and reasonable attorney fees and costs. As of November 9, 2026, we found no reported court decision applying the law.

Does SB 243 apply to general purpose chatbots?

It can. The law covers any AI system that gives adaptive, human-like responses and can meet a user's social needs across multiple interactions, unless an exclusion applies. Customer service, internal, limited game bots and simple voice assistants are excluded; general assistants with memory may fall inside.

Sources

1. California Legislative Information: SB 243
2. LegiScan: SB 243 chaptered text
3. Senator Steve Padilla: First-in-the-nation AI chatbot safeguards signed into law (Oct. 13, 2025)
4. Gunderson Dettmer: California SB 243 compliance requirements (Oct. 29, 2025)
5. Future of Privacy Forum: California SB 243 and beyond (Nov. 4, 2025)
6. Morrison Foerster: New York and California AI companion laws
7. ZwillGen: Adam's Law raises the bar for child chatbot protections
8. Common Sense Media: Governor Newsom signs Adam's Law (Sept. 10, 2026)
9. Senator Steve Padilla: Senate advances SB 300 (Jan. 26, 2026)
10. California Lawyers Association: 2026 status of California AI and privacy bills