Sacramento – Are California Democrats weak when it comes to protecting minors from sex trafficking?
That’s a question that caused confusion at the Capitol for over a week. But in reality, it’s a question Republicans have been asking for over the years, and they’ve answered with an overwhelming yes.
With the risk of stating obvious things, we would like to inform you that California has some of the strictest laws against sex trafficking in the country, including protection of minors. However, there have been long been claims about the laws relating to older teens, which are written and enforced by 16 and 17-year-olds. I’ll explain the reason immediately.
It is also clear that teenagers should not be bought and sold for sex. This makes the issue a constant winner for Republicans who regularly post bills to tighten penalties for sexual offences.
The nuances about why some Democrats continue to deny harsher penalties are easily lost when politicians discuss sex trafficking and are difficult to explain. And Democrats have given this same wound many times to keep their blood from washing away by following this Republican playbook.
The latest symptoms of this long-term drama have a twist. Congressional freshman Democrats wrote a bill that has been turned into Republican weapons this year.
Maggie Krell (D-Sacramento), a former state prosecutor specializing in human trafficking, wrote the law a few weeks ago.
Under current law, people trying to buy sex from children under the age of 15 are committing felony. However, those seeking to buy sex from someone age 16 or 17 have committed a crime, at the discretion of the prosecutor, which is “wobble” claimed as either a felony or a misdemeanor for the first offence, but require that minors prove that they are being trafficked for a higher crime.
Just like in the past few years when Republicans came up with ideas, Krell’s Democratic colleagues demanded that the felony portion of her law be removed. Krell finally agreed. This is a compromise that will keep the rest of the bill alive.
But then she fussed about it last week on the floor of Congress, supporting Republicans when she effectively opposed her own party.
Chaos exploded and madness continued.
Congressional Speaker Robert Rivas stripped Krell’s name from the bill and instead gave it to Nick Schultz (D-Balbank), a former prosecutor and another Democrat, Stephanie Nuguen (D-Elk Grove). Republicans have had field days in their press releases, speeches, and have begun running social media ads accusing Democrats of being soft in sexual offences. Oddly, Democrats have begun to run the same kind of ads against Republicans.
Then on Tuesday, Ribas and Schultz announced deterrents with Krell. If buying sex from a 16 or 17 year old person, if the buyer is more than three years older than the person being trafficked, and if the minor can prove that he or she is trafficked.
The committee hears the new bill on Wednesday and Krell’s name will return, and perhaps move forward with it.
There are both political takeaways and policy takeaways from all of these.
The reason why some Democrats say they have blocked automatic felony in the past is hard to follow. Essentially, their argument is that if an 18-year-old could buy Taco Bell or steam for a young friend and sexual acts continued, it could be considered a felony solicitation. Frankly, I have a hard time thinking that prosecutors will file these charges, but you never know.
The issues that underlie this perennial fight and which Democrats seem to struggle to talk about are philosophical. Some people with progressive objectives of criminal justice reform, including sex trafficking survivors, believe that the best way to combat abuse is to decriminalize or even legalize sex work.
Decriminalization essentially means that there is no current enforcement of many laws on books that lead to sex workers and buyers being arrested. It’s not to stop arresting people who force or force people into trafficking situations.
Assembly speaker Robert Ribus stripped the name of assembly member Maggie Cler from the bill and restored it after reaching a compromise.
(Rich Pedroncelli/AP)
The idea is that many sex workers, including young adults and people in the LGBTQ+ community, are sex workers of choice or need, and it’s useless and it’s not fair to grieve them with long criminal records that prevent them from acquiring jobs or housing, making their work even more dangerous.
That outlook has partnered with long-standing Democrats to address excessive sieges of black and brown people, which has led to Congress rarely adding new felonies to criminal law.
You can agree or disagree with those perspectives, but they are worth discussing. Our current political mood has changed dramatically with Proposition 36 being passed by voters and White House Trump.
Sex trafficking is at the heart of that shift.
Remember when Canon spread a conspiracy about international human smuggling rings, including that it was at the heart of a plan to sell children using furniture lists? Such panic about sex trafficking has become mainstream on the right, but the truth is sold by people most trafficked children know.
But the harsh crime has returned to fashion, and politicians don’t want to defend decriminalization. I think there are many pitfalls to decriminalization, but if some Democrats believe it is a solution, it is a policy failure that doesn’t talk about it, leading to voters misleading their status as weaknesses of sex offenders.
Having dedicated her professional life to stopping sex traffickers, Krell strongly believes that buyers need to face more outcomes, and she has a point. We can lock in as many sex traffickers as we can find, but there is always demand as long as the buyers feel safe.
It was a political failure to think that Democrat leaders would quietly roll on the issue. Krell is a rare politician, meaning what she says, what she means. It is possible that she was stabbed when her name was removed from the bill, but it only heightened her will to fight for changes in the law she believes.
If anyone comes out of this look, it’s Krell, who has proven that even his party leaders are willing to fight. But with a compromise in the age gap of three years, Democrats will now show a united front and point to the bill as a success for all involved.
But don’t be surprised if Republicans run the play again next year.
Source link
