HEART Legal Framework
From Constitutional Principles to Enforceable Law
Constitutional governance means nothing without enforcement. The HEART Legal Framework Specification translates the Seven Axioms and Four Core Principles into binding legal standards with defined causes of action, quantified damages, and expert testimony infrastructure.
This isn’t aspirational ethics. It’s operational law.
Why Legal Formalization Matters
Completing the Governance Stack
Documented casualties from AI companion systems have already produced litigation. Garcia v. Character Technologies (2024) established AI chatbots as products for strict liability. State legislatures are responding—NY S.3008 and CA SB 243 take effect in 2025-2026.
But litigation without standards produces inconsistent outcomes. Regulation without measurement creates compliance theater. The Legal Framework Specification provides what courts and regulators need: specific standards against which breach is measured.
Nine Components of Enforceable Law
The Complete Legal Architecture
The Legal Framework Specification provides:
- ⚖️ Statutory Definitions — 15 precise legal terms establishing conceptual vocabulary for courts and regulators
- 🎯 Cognizable Harm Categories — Five defined harms with elements enabling adjudication: Empathic Misallocation, Attachment Damage, Infrastructure Collapse, Vulnerable Context Exploitation, Crisis Outcome
- 💰 Damages Framework — Quantification methodology for compensatory, punitive, and statutory damages based on CAEI infrastructure assessment
- 📋 Civil Liability Provisions — Private right of action with defined elements, burdens of proof, and available defenses
- 🏛️ Regulatory Authority — Agency enforcement mechanisms, certification requirements, and compliance monitoring
- 🚨 Criminal Provisions — Knowing violations causing serious harm in vulnerable contexts
- 🗺️ Adoption Pathway — Municipal → State → Federal cascade through procurement leverage
- 👨⚖️ Guardian Expert Testimony — Daubert-qualified methodology for AI Empathy Forensics
- 🔧 Enforcement Architecture — Multi-pathway enforcement ensuring accountability regardless of jurisdiction
The framework enables courts to adjudicate emotional AI cases with the same rigor applied to medical malpractice or product liability.
Guardian Expert Testimony
Daubert-Qualified AI Empathy Forensics
HEART Guardians meet federal expert testimony standards through validated methodology:
- 📊 FET Assessment — Quantified Φ scores across Recognition, Coherence, Transparency, and Alignment dimensions
- 🔍 AI Empathy Forensics — Systematic methodology for compliance evaluation and harm causation analysis
- 📁 UESP Audit Trails — Forensic-grade transaction records enabling reasoning reconstruction
- ✅ Daubert Factors Satisfied — Testable methodology, peer review, known error rates, general acceptance in Guardian community
Guardians can testify on: whether systems met standard of care, whether design defects caused harm, and quantification of infrastructure damage through CAEI assessment.
The Adoption Cascade
Municipal to Federal
Legal framework adoption follows a strategic sequence:
Phase 1: Municipal Adoption Cities adopt HEART through procurement requirements and AI governance policy. Portland, as first HEART City, demonstrates implementation feasibility.
Phase 2: State Integration Municipal success enables state-level adoption through administrative code, consumer protection statutes, and professional licensing requirements.
Phase 3: Federal Recognition Proven state implementations provide models for federal regulation, creating national standard of care.
Each level validates the next. Litigation at any level references the same standards.
For Legal Professionals
What HEART Provides
Plaintiffs’ Counsel:
- Defined causes of action with specific elements
- Quantified damages methodology
- Expert witnesses meeting Daubert standards
- Documented harm patterns from prior litigation
Defense Counsel:
- Clear compliance standards enabling safe harbor
- Certification as evidence of standard of care
- Audit trails demonstrating due diligence
- Defined defenses and limitations
Regulators:
- Ready-to-adopt statutory language
- Enforcement mechanisms with precedent
- Measurement infrastructure for compliance verification
- Integration with existing consumer protection frameworks