NYC Council Convenes Rare Full-Body Hearing Grilling OpenAI, Anthropic, Google and Meta Under Oath

Since former Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon quit in September warning that AI "could kill us all by the end of the decade," New York City's response has escalated from subpoena threats to a full council interrogation. That hearing is happening today, Monday, October 5, with all 51 City Council members expected to attend in a rare "Committee of the Whole" session that began at 11 a.m. ET, according to CNBC and a release from Council Speaker Julie Menin.

This isn't a routine committee hearing. Menin's office says the full Council will question representatives from Anthropic, OpenAI, Google and Meta under oath about the risks their systems pose and weigh in on legislative fixes the city is drafting.

Who's Testifying

The opening witnesses are the critics: Coxon, former Google DeepMind researcher Alex Turner, and Daniel Kokotajlo, a former OpenAI researcher who now runs the AI Futures Project, according to Bloomberg and WABC-TV reporting carried by Super Power Daily. All three accepted Menin's invitation to AI whistleblowers specifically.

Then come the companies. Anthropic sent Logan Graham, head of its Frontier Red Team, the unit that stress-tests its models for dangerous capabilities. OpenAI sent Morgan Dwyer, head of policy development and operations. Google sent AI policy executive Alice Friend. Meta sent AI policy director Shane Cahill, according to Menin's office as reported by Bloomberg and the Straits Times. None of the four companies sent their CEOs.

City officials from Mayor Zohran Mamdani's administration, including an official named Samuel Levine, are also scheduled to testify, per the Straits Times.

Ten Bills, Not One

The hearing isn't just theater. The Council is weighing 10 separate proposals, according to WABC-TV's reporting published by Super Power Daily. They cover different enforcement mechanisms: mandatory "kill switches" giving operators direct control over AI systems, third-party audits before deployment, the right for people harmed by AI to sue developers, and a whistleblower program that would let employees collect a share of any fines their reports help generate.

A separate proposal would require the city to track AI's effect on the workforce, including jobs eliminated or displaced by the technology, adding a labor-market dimension to what's mostly been framed as a safety debate.

Menin's office has been explicit about why the companies are in the room at all. "Given the high stakes, these firms owe it to the public to come before the Council, answer our questions, and provide input on our proposed legislation under oath," she said, according to CNBC. Anthropic, OpenAI and Google only agreed to appear after Menin's office warned they could be subpoenaed. Meta had committed to attending earlier, per the Straits Times.

One company that hasn't fallen in line: Elon Musk's xAI. The Council issued it a subpoena last week after it failed to respond to testimony requests, Bloomberg reported. Menin said the Council may seek judicial enforcement in New York State Supreme Court if the unit doesn't comply. Business Today separately reported Musk may be rebranding the unit from xAI to xSI following President Trump's push on "Super Intelligence," though that rebrand has no bearing on the subpoena itself.

OpenAI, for its part, didn't wait for the hearing to make its case. The company sent a letter to Menin and the Council defending its safety practices, according to NY1's reporting cited by Super Power Daily, saying it tests for dangerous behavior, strengthens protections when needed, and wants to work with the city on "safe, useful and accountable AI."

The Jurisdiction Problem

AI regulation has historically been a federal and state matter, not a municipal one. New York Governor Kathy Hochul already announced a state-level AI registry requiring companies to register with Albany starting in November and report critical safety incidents within 72 hours, a policy that predates today's city hearing.

That overlap raises a fair question industry representatives and some free-market critics have pressed: does a 51-member city council need its own separate AI rulebook on top of a state registry and whatever Washington eventually does, or does that just produce a patchwork of conflicting compliance obligations for companies trying to operate nationally? Menin's camp argues the city, as a major hub for AI development and deployment, has a direct stake and the companies haven't earned the benefit of the doubt on self-regulation. Critics of local overreach argue duplicative city, state and federal rules mostly burden companies without closing any actual safety gap, since none of the bills create new technical safeguards that federal regulators couldn't mandate more uniformly.

None of the 10 bills were voted on or passed at today's hearing. They remain proposed legislation. The Council hasn't set a date for markup or a floor vote, and whether xAI complies with its subpoena, or forces Menin into court, remains the most concrete unresolved thread coming out of today's session.