AI CEOs Can Already Face Legal Liability for Dangerous or 'Unvetted' Systems, Former US FTC Chair Says

Artificial intelligence companies and their executives do not need an entirely new regulatory regime to face consequences for releasing dangerous systems, according to former US Federal Trade Commission chair Lina Khan, who says existing laws can already reach unsafe AI products.

Khan weighed in on the escalating debate over AI safety on Sunday as executives from some of the world's leading AI laboratories called for greater oversight amid fears that increasingly capable systems could become difficult to control.

'Law enforcers already have authority to charge companies and their CEOs for creating and releasing dangerous, unvetted, or defective products,' Lina Khan wrote on X.

'We shouldn't let discussions about new legal regimes distract from the fact that there's no AI exemption from laws already on the books.'

Her point does not mean an AI chief executive would automatically become personally liable whenever a model causes harm. Rather, Khan argues that regulators and prosecutors already have legal tools that could apply depending on executives' conduct and the circumstances surrounding a product's release.

Lina Khan Points to 1934 Supreme Court Ruling

Lina Khan also argued that existing competition law could apply when AI companies knowingly take dangerous shortcuts that pressure rivals to do the same.

She pointed to the Supreme Court's 1934 ruling in FTC v. R. F. Keppel & Bro., Inc., a landmark case examining the meaning of 'unfair methods of competition'.

The court held that a business practice could be unfair when it effectively forces competitors to either lose business or adopt conduct they feel strongly compelled not to follow.

Khan argues that a similar principle could apply to the modern AI race: if one company releases increasingly powerful systems without adequate safety measures, competitors may feel pressured to lower their own standards to avoid falling behind.

AI Safety Fight Reaches Washington

Her comments arrive as warnings from the AI industry itself have become increasingly urgent. Anthropic chief executive Dario Amodei, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman and other technology leaders have recently pushed for stronger safety standards and greater external oversight as frontier systems rapidly improve.

President Donald Trump has pushed back, dismissing calls to restrict development as a 'conspiracy' and warning that additional regulation could weaken the United States in its AI competition with China. Congress is nevertheless considering additional legislation.

Senate negotiators are discussing a proposed 'duty of care' requiring developers of the most advanced AI systems to design their products with the goal of preventing catastrophic risks, including assistance in developing nuclear or biological weapons.

Existing Rules Versus New AI Laws

Lina Khan's intervention adds another argument to that debate: lawmakers may need new rules for emerging dangers, but they should not assume AI companies currently operate in a legal vacuum.

The FTC already has authority over deceptive and unfair commercial practices, while other federal and state laws can potentially apply to defective products, fraud, negligence or other harmful conduct depending on the facts.

Khan chaired the FTC from June 2021 until January 2025 and became known for aggressively challenging major technology companies and expanding the agency's use of its antitrust and consumer-protection powers.

The legal question now is not simply whether Washington should create new AI laws, but how aggressively authorities are prepared to use the ones they already have. And Khan's warning to the industry is straightforward: artificial intelligence may be new, but that does not place its developers, or their executives, beyond existing law.