CA Attorney General backs restitution for sex trafficking victims.
California Attorney General Urges Court to Reverse Decision Denying Restitution to Sex Trafficking Survivor
After a recent Solano County Superior Court ruling denied a survivor of sex trafficking the right to restitution from her trafficker, California Attorney General Rob Bonta—the state’s chief law officer—recommended this week the court reverse its decision.
Mr. Bonta filed an amicus brief with the court Oct. 23 saying he has “great interest” in the legal issue and is able to assist with his perspective and argument on the matter. In such a brief, the court can consider or ignore Mr. Bonta’s remarks.
“Human trafficking is a heinous crime and survivors deserve our support as they heal,” said Mr. Bonta in a press release the same day. “Today’s amicus brief does just that by supporting the right of survivors to receive restitution. This survivor was exploited and abused by her trafficker; it goes beyond reason to deny her restitution to which she is legally entitled.”
At issue is a victim who was forced to perform commercial sex acts, of which she received no payment, by a defendant, Lamar Deshawn Hall, as well as others.
According to Mr. Bonta, the court denied the woman restitution for her lost wages because commercial sex is illegal. But he argued in his brief to the court that its decision was a misinterpretation of law, since the victim was forced into the occupation.
Mr. Bonta argued that regardless of what a person is forced to do, whether it is picking fruit, harvesting marijuana, providing salon services, working as a caretaker or servant, or performing commercial sex, victims in each case lose their freedom and are forced to work for free.
Assembly Bill 22, approved by then Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2005, authorized restitution for lost wages to victims of trafficking. The court, in its decision, created an added requirement that the earnings cannot be the product of commercial sex, since it’s legal, which Mr. Bonta argued against.
“The superior court’s interpretation swallows up the statute and misses its purpose: to allow human trafficking victims … a chance to recover from the devastating physical, mental and financial harm caused by the defendant,” he wrote in the brief.
In the press release, he also stated that denying the woman in the case restitution for the “work” she was forced to perform has implications that she was at fault, instead of the trafficker.
“It’s imperative that the restitution rights of trafficking victims be enforced so that they have a chance to recover from the devastating physical, mental, and financial impact of this extreme form of abuse,” the press release reads.
In 2021, the National Human Trafficking Hotline—which helps connect victims to services reported 1,300 human trafficking cases in California, the most in the nation at the time. According to the press release, trafficking in the state is most prevalent in hospitality, commercial sex, domestic work, and construction industries, as well as with migrants working in seasonal agricultural, residential care, and in the garment sector.
In response, Mr. Bonta launched the same year two teams within the California Department of Justice, with one covering Northern California and the other Southern California, to work with law enforcement to crack down on the issue.
Other efforts include the San Diego Human Trafficking Task Force, which also works with the DOJ, leading to the arrest of 627 traffickers and 647 victims helped since the work began in 2015, according to the press release.
“Denying recovery to a sex trafficking victim reinforces the stigma that these victims too often face in coming forward in the first place. The California Department of Justice will continue to do its part to combat human trafficking and protect California’s communities,” Mr. Bonta said in the press release.
How does the denial of restitution for sex trafficking survivors undermine their rights and perpetuate their victimization
Bonta argues is a misinterpretation of the law. He asserts that under California law, anyone who is coerced or forced into performing labor or services is entitled to restitution for their lost wages, regardless of the nature of the work.
Sex trafficking is a grave violation of human rights and a serious crime that inflicts immense physical, emotional, and psychological harm on its victims. It is an exploitative industry that preys on vulnerable individuals, often trapping them in a cycle of abuse and degradation. Victims of sex trafficking endure unimaginable suffering and deserve justice and support as they rebuild their lives.
Restitution plays a crucial role in the recovery and healing process for survivors of sex trafficking. It not only provides them with financial compensation for the wages they were denied but also acknowledges the harm they have suffered and helps restore their dignity and autonomy. Denying restitution to survivors perpetuates their victimization and further marginalizes them, leaving them without the resources necessary to rebuild their lives.
The denial of restitution in this particular case sets a concerning precedent that undermines the rights of sex trafficking survivors and fails to recognize the true nature of their exploitation. By categorizing commercial sex as illegal work, the court ignores the fundamental fact that these individuals were coerced and forced into this occupation against their will. It is unjust to punish victims for engaging in work they were compelled to do under duress.
California has been a leader in combating human trafficking and supporting survivors. Assembly Bill 22, which was enacted to provide restitution for lost wages to victims of trafficking, reflects the state’s commitment to addressing this issue effectively. However, the court’s decision contradicts the spirit and intention of this legislation and hinders the progress made in protecting and advocating for survivors.
The amicus brief filed by Attorney General Bonta highlights the urgency and importance of rectifying this decision. By voicing his support for the survivor’s right to restitution, he emphasizes the need to prioritize the well-being and rights of sex trafficking survivors. It is crucial that the court reconsider its ruling and align its decision with the principles of justice, compassion, and the fight against human trafficking.
Sex trafficking is a global crisis that demands a comprehensive and united response. Governments, law enforcement agencies, and civil society organizations must work together to strengthen legal frameworks, raise awareness, support survivors, and hold traffickers accountable. By rejecting the denial of restitution in this case, California can set an example for other states and nations in prioritizing the rights and well-being of sex trafficking survivors.
It is essential that we recognize the inherent vulnerability and immense courage of sex trafficking survivors. Denying them the restitution they are entitled to further victimizes them and perpetuates the cycle of exploitation.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
