Their alleged standing is predicated on a single count of violating the Washington Public Nuisance Law, RCW 7.48.010 (see page 86 of their complaint[1])[2]. So their torturous logic is that somehow not only are the defendants' services addictive, but that the addiction thereof spurs students to engage in violent and/or disruptive behaviors that interferes with the enjoyment of school property and the safety of its employees (thus violating RCW 7.48.010 et seq.), thereby giving these clowns standing to sue.

Even if we take their claims at face value that the defendants knowingly created products that are demonstrably addictive, materially contributing to the conditions that occasioned this suit, the offences named in that section are unconstitutionally vague and, to the extent that it is those vague portions are those asserted in the cause of action, should be unenforceable.

I'm having a hard time believing Seattle School District No 1 actually thinks they'll succeed on the "merits" of this case, and am inclined to agree that this is nothing more than a publicity stunt on their part to call attention to a "problem" that has a fairly clear solution: students with behavioral issues tied to use of social networking services that are disruptive to school functions can and should be expelled. Problem solved.

--

[1] https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.wawd.31...

[2] https://app.leg.wa.gov/rcw/default.aspx?cite=7.48