Do you support protecting pedophiles or protecting children?

It seems like a bit of a no-brainer, but that’s the level of debate the California legislature stooped to this week when it argued over a bill that would increase criminal penalties for

the

sex trafficking

by

minors.

By the logic that has dominated the Capitol for the past few days, I would have fallen into the camp that supposedly protects pedophiles.

Now, in case you need to hear, I don’t support pedophiles or sex traffickers.

But I am also not in favor of new laws with old problems, and I am not in favor of crushing discussions under the guise of conservative oversimplification.

The bill in question is Senate Bill 14, drafted by Republican Shannon Grove, which represents a portion of the Central Valley that

stretches

about

go

from Fresno to Bakersfield and into the desert.

The bill would make sex trafficking of a minor a serious felony, a California designation that would make it eligible for our

“three strokes” Three strokes

law means 25 years to life if you hit that third qualifying crime. Sounds more than reasonable for selling a child for sex. Sounds good.

But the devil is always in the details, and Grove’s proposal raised two major concerns among those who have made criminal justice reform a priority, chief among them

Los Angeles

Assemblyman Reggie Jones-Sawyer (D-Los Angeles).

Jones-Sawyer heads the influential committee on public safety in the General Assembly, and while the bill passed the Senate unanimously (but with many changes to make it narrower), he flagged it in a hearing this week, effectively making it was prevented from proceeding. .

Chaos ensued, with some supporters of the bill accusing him and others who opposed it of protecting pedophiles that cultural firebombing was intended to stop all dissent.

The leaders of the Freedom Angels, who rose to prominence a few years ago for their opposition to vaccines and the subsequent attempted recall of Gov. Gavin Newsom went on the offensive, as did countless people who believe in Qanon-related conspiracy

yes theories

that democrats and “elites” traffick children.

Threats, including death threats and people hoping that lawmakers’ children will be kidnapped and raped, have flooded the phones and emails from Jones-Sawyer and other lawmakers who did not vote in favor of the bill.

Grove, who I spoke to on Thursday, was clear that she doesn’t approve of any of these tactics “any way.”

She points out that threatening a government official is a crime in California, and while her colleagues may disagree, she’s all for turning those threats over to law enforcement for investigation.

But that pressure had its effect. After Republicans threatened to force a vote on the bill, Assembly Democrats (who have a new leader, Robert Rivas of Hollister, meaning they’re still figuring out how to get along nicely with each other) can play) it back to the Jones-Sawyer committee to saveface. This time it went by in a tense two minute session in which two influential Democrats left quickly after refusing to vote and a Republican threw his fist in the air in victory.

What comes next is uncertain, but we need to look at the concerns of Jones-Sawyer and others

S

raised. Because having concerns, even if the Senate passes the bill, is legitimate and the kind of nuanced scrutiny we should expect from our elected officials.

A big problem is that it bears the bill

one the

potentially slender, but there prosecutors could charge sex trafficking victims with a serious crime that could see them incarcerated for decades.

As I have written before, women and children who are victims of human trafficking, subject to terrible abuse and fear, sometimes work alongside their traffickers. Sometimes this may include helping the trafficker control other victims. It is almost always a means of survival, and a forced one at that.

Grove acknowledges this.

“This is like slavery,” she told me. “The trafficker controls every move there.”

But because of that collaboration, women have been convicted of trafficking, and Jones-Sawyer and others worry that the bill leaves open the possibility that it could continue to happen despite amendments to the bill in the Senate designed to address the problem. The fate of the victims is usually left to the discretion of prosecutors, and most prosecutors have become better informed in recent years as California moved from considering sex trafficking victims willing “prostitutes” regardless of age to people who are worth protecting. But you never know when that discretion will turn ugly.

“Usually these tough crime laws have a sort of shotgun effect where they go out and arrest everyone,” Jones-Sawyer told me. “Then they snare some innocent people. It’s really important that we don’t criminalize these victims.”

There is also concern about creating more problems in the already problematic

Three strokes three strokes

law. Many who support criminal justice reform would like to see the 1994 law, which was passed in the midst of our failed war on drugs, removed from the books.

Three

S

trikes has been instrumental in the over-incarceration of black and brown people. Black people make up 6% of California’s population, but are about “30% of the state’s prison population, 25% of the prison population, and 26% of the probation population,” according to the 2021 report from the Penal Code Review Committee . Code.

Do I care what race a child sex trafficker is? No. But many of the crimes that have resulted in strikes for people have nothing to do with human trafficking and can seem quite minor. Vanessa Russell, the founding executive director of Love Never Fails, an advocacy and aid organization for human trafficking survivors, points out that stealing a wallet while riding a bus is a criminal offence. For that reason, she first opposed Senate Bill 14, not wanting to combine those lesser crimes with human trafficking.

“The [

three-strikes

] list is definitely flawed, which is why I had a problem with it,” she told me.

She now supports the bill because, like all of us, she wants to protect children and feels some of her concerns have been addressed. But she said she wishes Senate Bill 14 had stayed away

three strokes

and instead made sex trafficking a crime in its own right requiring longer sentences with no chance of parole for things like good behavior points.

“Why can’t we just create another language that says trafficking a minor requires you to serve 80% of your time, period?”

Good questions. Let’s ask.

But the biggest reason Senate Bill 14 deserves more discussion is because it doesn’t directly help victims. California has made tremendous strides to center in recent years

it is his

Human trafficking response centered around stopping it before it starts and helping victims find meaningful escapes that allow them to heal and move forward.

This bill may keep victims safer by locking up pimps, but there will always be more pimps. The bill misses California’s focus on victim centering

,

and reducing human trafficking by reducing the number of women and children available to hunt and protecting those who have already been victimized.

For example, it could address the fact that women are still imprisoned for crimes related to their trafficking. How about providing a mechanism for those cases

deer

investigated? Why don’t we fund enough programs that help women become housed and economically stable when they escape? Why can’t we ensure that the threat of prosecution is not used to force victims to testify, as is too often the case?

“It’s good to have punishments for those who traffick children, but it’s just as important to focus on the needs of the survivors,” Maggy Krell told me.

Krell is a prosecutor who specializes in human trafficking and has put her share of pimps behind bars. She is running for a legislature seat to represent parts of Sacramento, and supports Senate Bill 14. But she also says focusing on helping victims is critical.

“The bills I will push if I am successful in my race will be bills that focus on the needs of survivors, not defendants,” she told me. Bills to provide investment in undeserving communities, bills to remove barriers

healthcare

and housing for victims, bills to help victims recover from trauma.

Which means she’s likely to join lawmakers like Jones-Sawyer, who wants, as he puts it, to get “monsters” off the streets while also tackling the root causes of human trafficking.

Because yes, trafficking a minor should be a serious crime.

But stopping human trafficking must also be one

S

serious discussion, not one smothered by frenzy and intimidation.