How did your state score? Find out here!
The Protected Innocence Challenge, launched in 2011, is an annual report that grades each state on the strength of their laws to fight child sex trafficking. Each year a toolkit of resources is released to help advocates and legislators improve their laws.
This year's report demonstrates a 7-years of progress in improving state laws that combat child sex trafficking, yet also calls attention to the gaps where states have not progressed. When launched in 2011, 26 states had an “F” grade on 41 points of law that impact child sex trafficking. This year there are now 36 As and Bs. Check out these and other stats on our website.
Texas scored an A and Missouri scored a B.
The major area of improvement needed in Texas is in decriminalizing minors who are victims of human trafficking. Texas’s sex trafficking law currently criminalizes the use of a minor under the age of 18 in a commercial sex act regardless of force, fraud, or coercion. The prostitution law refers to the sex trafficking law to provide an affirmative defense for sex trafficking victims.
Texas’ organized criminal activity law specifically targets trafficking of persons and includes certain CSEC offenses as predicate crimes,
allowing use of this law to prosecute sex trafficking networks.All commercially sexually exploited children are defined as juvenile sex trafficking victims. Texas’s sex trafficking and CSEC laws do not prohibit a defense based on the willingness of the minor to engage in the commercial sex act. Texas’s prostitution laws do not prohibit the criminalization of minors under 18, but case law has held that a child under 14 may not be charged with prostitution. Juvenile sex trafficking victims also face criminalization for commercial sex acts committed as a result of their victimization, but may assert an affirmative defense that she or he was sex trafficked. Additionally, a juvenile sex trafficking victim may be able to avoid a delinquency adjudication through participation in the Trafficking Persons Program, but entrance to the program is not mandated. Further, specialized services are available under the Governor’s Program for Victims of Child Sex Trafficking. For purposes of child welfare involvement, the definition of “abuse” includes child sex trafficking, CSEC, prostitution, and ICSE; additionally, the definition of “abuse” does not include a “caregiver” barrier because abuse may be committed by “a person,” which is broad enough to allow child welfare involvement in non-familial trafficking cases.
For the full Texas report click here
Missouri criminalizes child sex trafficking without requiring use of force, fraud, or coercion, and the trafficking law includes buyer, trafficker, and facilitator conduct. Further, the definitions of abuse and neglect specifically include child sex trafficking. However, specialized services are not statutorily mandated, and the critical tool of wiretapping is not expressly permitted in trafficking investigations, handicapping law enforcement and prosecutors.
Missouri law expressly prohibits a defense based on the willingness of the minor to engage in the commercial sex act if the victim is under 14; this defense is not prohibited for older minors. Prostitution laws apply to minors under 18, meaning juvenile sex trafficking victims may face criminalization for commercial sex acts committed as a result of their victimization. However, Missouri law mandates referral of juvenile sex trafficking victims to DSS and DJJ for a service and assistance assessment, but access to specialized services is not required. For purposes of child welfare intervention, the definitions of abuse and neglect include child sex trafficking without specifying a relationship between the child and the perpetrator of the abuse.
For the full Missouri report click here
No comments:
Post a Comment