Lawyer accuses Sam Altman-led OpenAI of sending police to his home, demanding private messages over AI regulation

OpenAI

A lawyer and AI policy advocate, Nathan Calvin, has accused OpenAI of trying to silence him after he pushed for stronger AI regulation in California. In a series of posts on X, Calvin claimed that a sheriff’s deputy showed up at his home to deliver a subpoena from OpenAI — a move he described as “terrifying” and “intimidating.”

According to Calvin, the subpoena demanded access to his private messages with legislators, former OpenAI employees, and students involved in drafting California’s new AI regulation bill, SB 53. He said OpenAI had “no legal right” to request such information and that his team submitted a formal objection. “They never replied,” he wrote.

Calvin is the founder of Encode AI, a small nonprofit that advocates for responsible AI laws. He alleged that the incident marked the most stressful period of his professional life. “Encode has three full-time employees — going against the highest-valued private company in the world is terrifying,” he said.

He also accused OpenAI of attempting to weaken the California bill before it was signed by Governor Gavin Newsom. According to him, the company sent a letter to Newsom’s office asking for exemptions that would have removed key safety requirements for firms conducting AI evaluations with the federal government.

Calvin further took aim at OpenAI’s global policy chief, Chris Lehane, calling him a “master of the political dark arts” and dismissing Lehane’s claim that the company “worked to improve the bill.” He pointed out Lehane’s history of representing major corporations like Boeing and Goldman Sachs, alleging that intimidation tactics were part of his strategy.

Despite his criticism, Calvin said he has “complicated feelings” about OpenAI. He praised the company’s AI safety research and acknowledged that many employees genuinely care about ensuring AI benefits humanity. But he said his experience showed another side — one that uses legal pressure to suppress dissent.

“Does anyone believe these actions are consistent with OpenAI’s nonprofit mission to ensure AGI benefits humanity?” Calvin asked. “OpenAI still has time to do better. I hope they do.”

OpenAI has not publicly commented on Calvin’s claims but has previously defended its subpoenas, saying they were part of efforts to understand whether advocacy groups opposing the company are linked to competitors.