I'm no lawyer, however, I have taken college classes in law, politics, and investigation/interrogation. I believe I've learned enough from these classes to make an educated guess about the legality of the sexually functional 132 cm dolls from DS doll according to U.S. Law.
There are two laws that may be cited if one were to prosecute an owner and user of the doll. The PROTECT Act of 2003, and Title 18 U.S. Code Chapter 110, any crimes pertaining to child pornography as child pornography is defined by § 2256: Source:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2256
“child pornography” means any visual depiction, including any photograph, film, video, picture, or computer or computer-generated image or picture, whether made or produced by electronic, mechanical, or other means, of sexually explicit conduct, where—
(A) the production of such visual depiction involves the use of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct;
(B) such visual depiction is a digital image, computer image, or computer-generated image that is, or is indistinguishable from, that of a minor engaging in sexually explicit conduct; or
(C) such visual depiction has been created, adapted, or modified to appear that an identifiable minor is engaging in sexually explicit conduct.
“minor” means any person under the age of eighteen years;
“identifiable minor”—
(A) means a person—
(I) who was a minor at the time the visual depiction was created, adapted, or modified; or
(II) whose image as a minor was used in creating, adapting, or modifying the visual depiction; and
(ii) who is recognizable as an actual person by the person’s face, likeness, or other distinguishing characteristic, such as a unique birthmark or other recognizable feature; and
(B) shall not be construed to require proof of the actual identity of the identifiable minor.
The PROTECT Act of 2003 does not contain any legal provisions prohibiting the private sexual use of an object that may or may not be considered by some as a "minor". The exception, I think, is if the object is "indistinguishable" from an actual minor, a real person. Then I think it would fall under child pornography statutes. These may not be limited to photos, but real life simulation is probably included.
However, we can all agree that though the 132 cm doll does look young, it does not look like a real person. And that is why I believe it is safe to say that ownership and use it would not fall under either child abuse, sexual offenses involving minors, nor child pornography laws. The exception would be if you made actual attempts to represent this doll as a minor, or took photographs of it involving sexually explicit conduct where it appears to be representing a minor. Then you would be arrested as a pedophile, and the doll and the images of it (as long as it doesn't look like a real minor), would merely be used as evidence for the pedophilia charges. The charges would not be for the dolls or images of them, they would just be used as evidence.
The case provided ctalon,
http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/ ... -jail-bait, shows this as well. The feds prosecuted this person for online trafficking of child pornography. The dolls they found during their search is merely evidence used to prove that the person is guilty of crimes involving child pornography. There are no charges against this person for possessing child-like inflatable sex dolls because the dolls do not look like real persons.
During investigations, sexual deviance, and evidence of it, is only considered if it relates to an actual crime being investigated. You do not get charged for having the sexual deviance, or evidence of it. You get charged with the crime, and the sexual deviance, and evidence of sexual deviance, is merely used as evidence to prosecute you for an actual crime. The dolls, as long as they don't look like real persons, and this means indistinguishable from a real person according to the definition, would only be confiscated and used as evidence if you've committed a crime that relates to it. At least, this is as far as I am aware and what my classes have taught me.
So in the end, as long as you're not a pedophile, trying to represent the doll as a minor, taking sexually explicit photographs of it where it looks as though it represents a minor, or not involved with anything that has to do with child pornography, your private sexual use of this young looking doll is not illegal, nor is it legal to obtain any information about your private usage of it without your consent due to privacy protection laws.
I am in the process of ordering one. So I can let you know if I experience any troubles with it or not. I don't expect to though. And don't worry, I'm not a pedophile. I'm probably a lot younger than most of you (college aged). This doll looks much more like many of my fellow college students than children, especially the pretty ladies from China, South Korea, and Taiwan. Plus, the 132 cm doll is the only one I can afford (138+ is too expensive), and I don't have very much room in my small apartment, so this is a better option for storage purposes as well.
By the way, I think the exception to what I said is if you live in Alabama. I hear all sex toys are illegal in that state. But again, you'd only be prosecuted for having a sex toy, not having a sex toy that looks young.