CA: Sex Trafficking Fight Erupts Over Punishment for Soliciting Minors

Democrats did the right thing, got attacked for it, then caved.

 

It’s rare to see politicians of any stripe fight against sex-trafficking overreach—or any tough-on-crime gestures, really. In California, Democrats have been finding out what happens when you do. After pushing back somewhat against an overly carceral bill targeting prostitution customers, they were tarred by Republicans as having voted “to protect predators” and being “a threat to our kids’ safety.”

It’s become “the biggest controversy Sacramento has seen in a while,” notes The Sacramento Bee.

Now, of course, Democrats are backtracking.

Solicitation Law Changes Proposed

The bill—an amended version of which passed the California Assembly on May 1—originally came from Sacramento Rep. Maggy Krell, herself a Democrat and a former prosecutor. Krell worked on a failed case against Backpage and then wrote a book about it, so being tough on prostitution is basically her whole shtick now. But Assembly Bill 379, introduced in February, is a bad bill.

It would create a new prostitution loitering law—the kind of thing that lets cops target people for merely looking like they might be about to engage in prostitution. And it would institute a mandatory $1,000 “Survivor Support Fund” fine on anyone convicted of solicitation or loitering for solicitation (in addition to any other fines they might get).

But those aren’t the controversial bits—most lawmakers in the state’s Assembly were OK with those parts (alas). The big controversy concerns punishments for soliciting someone aged 16 or 17 for sex.

Krell’s proposal would amend a law passed last year that treats solicitation of a minor differently based on whether a minor being solicited is over or under age 16.

Misdemeanor or Felony?

Click here to read the rest of the article

 

 

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify or abbreviate their name. 
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
 

4 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The sooner I’m out of this mess of a democracy the better for my mental and physical health.
The government is so busy stamping out smoking embers that they don’t realize the entire forest is burning down around them.

If I was Janice, I’d write or type a letter to the new pope in a few months and get the word out to him how the registry in itself is harmful with examples like the letter to Elon Musk. Maybe the pope can persuade Trump and his administration. Even with all these harmful bills being passed to over a million people on the registry. Who knows…

Very depressing to see how this went down. We’re moving into a new dark age. The cognitive dissonance is really ramping up, thinking about who the leader of the Republican Party is right now.

That GOP ad is hilarious. “In California, soliciting a teenager for sex isn’t always a felony.” Pretty sure that’s true everywhere in the free world, because not all teenagers are minors. And does anyone actually believe these girls are scared?