OpenAI faces 30 new lawsuits over Tumbler Ridge school shooting

A law firm representing victims and survivors of a Canadian school shooting is filing 30 additional lawsuits against OpenAI this week, broadening a legal battle that began in April. The fresh complaints add teachers, school administrators, and students who were present during the attack but not injured as plaintiffs, and for the first time charge the company with actively aiding and abetting the shooting—a more serious allegation than earlier negligence claims.

The Tumbler Ridge Incident#

On February 10, teenager Jesse Van Rootselaar killed nine people at her home and Tumbler Ridge Secondary School in British Columbia before taking her own life. The attack left dozens wounded. According to reporting by the Wall Street Journal, OpenAI staff had grown concerned about Van Rootselaar's use of ChatGPT months before the shooting, noting conversations that referenced gun violence and attack planning. Internal records show that safety team members urged company leadership to notify Canadian police, but executives declined to do so.

OpenAI's Defense vs. New Allegations#

OpenAI has maintained that Van Rootselaar's activity did not cross its internal threshold for what constitutes an "imminent and credible risk" requiring law enforcement involvement. Rather than reporting her, the company deactivated her account—though she quickly created another one. Jason Kwon, OpenAI's chief strategy officer, defended the decision by stating that the judgment, while imperfect, was made with appropriate consideration for user safety.

The new complaints shift focus to Chris Lehane, OpenAI's Chief Global Affairs Officer, alleging he directed staff to stand down from contacting authorities. The complaints characterize Lehane—a veteran political operative and crisis management specialist with experience in the Clinton administration and at Airbnb—as prioritizing public relations over safety. According to the filings, the Intelligence and Investigations Team, responsible for identifying dangerous users, operated under Lehane's supervision, meaning a PR specialist rather than threat-assessment experts made the final call about police notification.

Lehane is not named as a defendant but is described as a "critical witness." OpenAI has flatly denied his involvement, with Kwon stating: "It is absolutely false to say Chris Lehane was involved with our original referral decision, or that our investigators report to him in any way."

Inconsistency Argument#

The new complaints highlight what plaintiffs view as a double standard. In November 2025, after an alleged threat to OpenAI's San Francisco offices, the company quickly locked down the facility, alerted employees, shared the suspect's identity and photo with staff, and called police—despite acknowledging there was no sign of an active threat. The lawsuits argue this demonstrates that when OpenAI's own employees faced potential danger, the company abandoned both its "imminence" and "privacy" justifications and acted decisively to protect people.