Content area
Full text
Abstract
In this paper, we explore third parties who unexpectedly fell within the legal definition of a sex trafficker. The anti-trafficking lobby and media stories frequently portray traffickers as organised, psychopathic, violent, and child kidnappers. We dismantle these depictions by showing the unexpected people who qualify as traffickers. This paper incorporates findings from two studies involving eighty-five third parties in New York City and forty-nine in Chicago. We analyse how teenagers, drivers, and boyfriends qualify as traffickers under US law. We find that two-thirds of them hold inaccurate views about the difference between sex trafficking and facilitating prostitution. Trafficking can be incidental or temporary, and traffickers in these samples were often oblivious to their legal status, potentially resulting in lengthy prison sentences. We conclude by calling for differential sentencing based on traffickers' age, and awareness campaigns designed to alert third parties of the legal distinctions between pandering and sex trafficking.
Keywords: domestic sex trafficking, pimping, US sex trafficking laws, stereotypes
Introduction
Many sex workers, 'pimps',1 and even ancillary players in the sex trade in the United States have crossed the legal line and fall under the legal definition of sex trafficking (ST) per the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) of 2000. The TVPA defined sex trafficking as the 'recruitment, harboring, transporting, provision, or obtaining of a person for the purpose of a commercial sex act' when 'induced to perform a sex act through force, fraud or coercion' (22 US Code 22 USC 7102(8)). The TVPA blurs pandering2 and ST by expanding the definition of coercion to include psychological tactics, such as declarations of false love, establishing economic control, and inducing drug dependence.
The TVPA also posits that anyone younger than eighteen who sells sex with a third party is designated a trafficking victim, and the third party commits a 'severe form of trafficking in persons'.3 This legislation created a broad definition of ST. In cases with the traditional dyads who sell sex, Farrell et aL found that half of the ST cases investigated by law enforcement involved a minor,4 and Lugo-Graulich's study found that states with Safe Harbour laws5 had more ST prosecutions.6 However, ST legislation, even with safe harbour laws, still results in the prosecution of teenagers as sex traffickers if they facilitate...