AFST litigation established — risk score without audit = civil rights violation pattern
—CPRA automated decision-making + AB 5 spillover
Regulatory exposure — commonly overlooked:
County social worker relies on AI score — county owns harm, vendor owns subscription agreement. · CPRA ADM opt-out requires proof of what automated system decided — receipt is opt-out infrastructure.
TAM / Exposure
400K+ children in foster care US · AFST-style tools nationwide
Insurance lines
Municipal liability · Social services E&O
Exhibit authority
California CPRA ADM Pack — Child Welfare AI Decision Pack
Global leaders
HHS · Allegheny County (AFST) · ACLU · Casey Family Programs · CPPA · CA AG · Silicon Valley insurers
ICWA compliance
Native family placement AI must respect ICWA — wrong recommendation = federal violation.
Mandatory reporter
AI flagging abuse must prove escalation path — receipt of CRISIS classification is legal artifact.
Photo analysis
Image AI in welfare checks — multimodal receipt required per input hash.
[California] Trial bar capital
California plaintiffs bar most aggressive on AI — independent verify changes settlement calculus.
[California] Tech HQ effect
Every global platform's AI policy tested first in California courts.
[Text / Chat] Modality hook
Baseline — all frameworks apply to text decisions.
7 mandate layers (live)
Regulatory ClockCountdown to operative regulatory deadline — NAIC adoption, GSE mandate, EU transposition.Open →
Domain ClassifierIndustry-specific SAFE/CRISIS/VIOLATION with regulatory framework mapping.Open →
Exhibit / Filing PackRegulator-ready external validation — NAIC Exhibit D, Fannie QC, EU FRIA, FDA Part 11.Open →
Mandate RegistryEnroll deployers/insureds under vertical-specific governance mandate.Open →