Alaska House votes to raise age of sexual consent — but with a caveat
The Alaska Legislature is on pace to raise the state's age of sexual consent to 18 next year, after the state House voted 39-0 to approve House Bill 101 on Monday.
The bill now goes to the state Senate, which is expected to take it up in January, when lawmakers convene for the second year of the 34th Alaska State Legislature.
The bill comes from Rep. Andrew Gray, D-Anchorage, who said on Monday that it represents a way to fight rape and child sexual assault.
Under current law, it is legal for an adult to have sex in Alaska with a 16-year-old or 17-year-old who consents. If that child is assaulted, Gray said, they must prove that they did not consent.
'This makes prosecutions of these cases of sexual assault and sex trafficking more difficult, especially if the young person had seen the perpetrator on multiple occasions, or if alcohol and drugs were involved,' Gray said.
The bill has a significant exception: 'For teens 13 to 15 years old, they can consent to sex with someone up to four years older than them. Sixteen- and 17-year-olds can consent to sex with someone up to six years older than them,' he said.
That exemption came at the suggestion of domestic violence shelters, sexual assault experts and homeless shelters, who were concerned that without the close-in-age exemption, they would deter teens from seeking help.
Additional clauses in the bill criminalize the sending of explicit images of 16-year-olds and 17-year-olds.
'It is my hope that this bill will prevent the strategic targeting of 16- and 17-year-olds by predators,' Gray said.
Rep. Sarah Vance, R-Homer, also spoke in support of the bill.
'This bill reminds us that those who are under 18 are still children,' she said. 'They're vulnerable youth. They are figuring out who they are in the world. … Raising the age of consent to 18 makes it easier for law enforcement to say, 'We're going to help you.' It puts the onus on the offender instead of on the victim. That child victim no longer would have to prove that what happened to them was not consensual.'
Vance and Gray unsuccessfully attempted last year to change the age of consent, but the proposal ran into technical problems and the session ended before those could be resolved.
HB 101's passage came three years after the Legislature voted to limit child marriage by banning marriages involving Alaskans younger than 16. Because sex is permitted between married partners of any age, that effectively raised the state's age of consent to 16.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Los Angeles Times
6 minutes ago
- Los Angeles Times
Newsom responds to Trump's gutter politics
SACRAMENTO — In fighting President Trump, Gov. Gavin Newsom reminds me of actor Gene Hackman's hard-nosed character in the movie 'Mississippi Burning.' Hackman plays a take-no-prisoners FBI agent, Rupert Anderson, who is investigating the disappearance of three young civil rights workers in racially segregated 1964 Mississippi. His partner and boss is stick-by-the-rules agent Alan Ward, played by Willem Dafoe. The 1988 film is loosely based on a true story. The two agents eventually find the victims' murdered bodies and apprehend the Ku Klux Klan killers after Anderson persuades Ward to discard his high-road rule book in dealing with uncooperative local white folks. 'Don't drag me into your gutter, Mr. Anderson,' Ward sternly tells his underling initially. Anderson shouts back: 'These people are crawling out of the SEWER, MR. WARD! Maybe the gutter's where we oughta be.' And it's where they go. Only then do they solve the case. Newsom contends Trump is playing gutter politics by pressuring Texas Gov. Greg Abbott and the GOP-controlled Legislature to redraw the state's U.S. House seats in an effort to elect five additional Republicans in next year's midterm elections. House seats normally are redrawn only at the beginning of a decade after the decennial census. Democrats need to gain just three net seats to retake control of the House and end the GOP's one-party rule of the federal government. Trump is trying to prevent that by browbeating Texas and other red states into gerrymandering their Democrat-held House districts into GOP winners. Republicans currently hold 25 of Texas' 38 House seats. Democrats have 12. In California, it's just the opposite — even more so. Out of 52 seats, Democrats outnumber Republicans 43 to 9, with room to make it even more lopsided. 'We could make it so that only four Republicans are left,' says Sacramento-based redistricting guru Paul Mitchell, vice president of Political Data Inc. Mitchell already is crafting potential new maps in case Newsom follows through with his threat to retaliate against Texas by redrawing California's districts to help Democrats gain five seats, neutralizing Republican gains in the Lone Star State. Newsom and the Legislature would be seizing redistricting responsibility from an independent citizens' commission that voters created in 2010. They took the task away from lawmakers because the politicians were acting only in their own self-interest, effectively choosing their own voters. As they do in Texas and most states, particularly red ones. But the governor and Democrats would be ignoring California voters' will — at least as stated 15 years ago. And Newsom would be down in the political gutter with Trump on redistricting. But that doesn't seem to bother him. 'They're playing by a different set of rules,' Newsom recently told reporters, referring to Trump and Republicans. 'They can't win by the traditional game. So they want to change the game. We can act holier than thou. We could sit on the sidelines, talk about the way the world should be. Or we can recognize the existential nature that is the moment.' Newsom added that 'everything has changed' since California voters banned gerrymandering 15 years ago. That's indisputable given Trump's bullying tactics and his inhumane domestic policies. 'I'm not going to be the guy that said, 'I could have, would have, should have,'' Newsom continued. 'I'm not going to be passive at this moment. I'm not going to look at my kids in the eyes and say, 'I was a little timid.'' Newsom's own eyes, of course, are on the White House and a potential 2028 presidential bid. He sees a national opportunity now to attract frustrated Democratic voters who believe that party leaders aren't fighting hard enough against Trump. Newsom continued to echo Hackman's script Friday at a news conference in Sacramento with Texas Democratic legislators. Referring to Trump and Texas Republicans, Newsom asserted: 'They're not screwing around. We cannot afford to screw around. We have to fight fire with fire.' But yakking about redrawing California's congressional maps is easy. Actually doing it would be exceedingly difficult. 'Texas can pass a plan tomorrow. California cannot,' says Tony Quinn, a former Republican consultant on legislative redistricting. Unlike in California, there's no Texas law that forbids blatant gerrymandering. California's Constitution requires redistricting by the independent commission. Moreover, a 1980s state Supreme Court ruling allows only one redistricting each decade, Quinn says. Trying to gerrymander California congressional districts through legislation without first asking the voters' permission would be criminally stupid. Newsom would need to call a special election for November and persuade voters to temporarily suspend the Constitution, allowing the Legislature to redraw the districts. Or the Legislature could place a gerrymandered plan on the ballot and seek voter approval. But that would be risky. A specific plan could offer several targets for the opposition — the GOP and do-gooder groups. In either case, new maps would need to be drawn by the end of the year to fit the June 2026 primary elections. Mitchell says polling shows that the independent commission is very popular with voters. Still, he asserts, 'there's something in the water right now. There's potential that voters will not want to let Trump run ramshackle while we're being Pollyannish.' 'The reality is that a lot of Democrats would hit their own thumb with a hammer if they thought it would hurt Trump more.' Mitchell also says that California could out-gerrymander Texas by not only weakening current GOP seats but by strengthening competitive Democratic districts. Texas doesn't have that opportunity, he says, because its districts already have been heavily gerrymandered. Democratic consultant Steve Maviglio says Newsom is 'trying to put the toothpaste back in the tube' and doubts it will work. 'Unilaterally disarming was a mistake. 'But Newsom's not wrong. They play hardball. We don't.' Newsom and California Democrats should fight Trump and Texas Republicans in the MAGA gutter, using all weapons available. As Hackman's character also says: 'Don't mean s— to have a gun unless you (sic) ready to use it.' The must-read: Texas Republicans aim to redraw House districts at Trump's urging, but there's a risk The TK: The Age-Checked Internet Has Arrived The L.A. Times Special: Trump's top federal prosecutor in L.A. struggles to secure indictments in protest cases Until next week,George Skelton —Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.
The Hill
6 minutes ago
- The Hill
Senate GOP quietly urges House to shift approach on shutdown talk
Senate Republicans say President Trump has made it clear that he doesn't want a government shutdown, and they're urging House GOP lawmakers to tone down their approach to the Sept. 30 funding deadline. House Republicans jammed Senate Democrats in March with a partisan funding bill, which Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer (N.Y.) reluctantly voted for to avoid a shutdown. But the political dynamics are different now. Schumer is under heavy pressure to fight harder against Trump and his MAGA-allies, heightening the chance of a shutdown if Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) tries to use the same playbook. 'I know that our side won't want a shutdown, Trump hates that and rightly so,' said a Republican senator, who requested anonymity to discuss conversations with the White House. The senator said 'the fate of the approps bills' to fund the government in fiscal year 2026 will be the focus of the GOP conference before it leaves for a four-week August recess. A second Republican senator who requested anonymity said that Trump, who dined with Senate Republicans at the White House recently to celebrate the passage of the One Big, Beautiful Bill Act, has made it clear to his allies on Capitol Hill that he wants to avoid a shutdown in the fall. The president is focused on landing trade deals and touting the accomplishments included in the massive tax and spending package Congress passed before July 4. This is a big reason why Senate Republicans have sought common ground with Democrats on the annual appropriations bills, hoping to put behind them the bruising partisan battles over the reconciliation bill and a measure that clawed back $9 billion in PBS, NPR and global aid funding. The senator said that higher spending levels in the Senate appropriations bills offer a 'better path' to avoiding a government shutdown in the fall because they are less likely to provoke opposition from Democrats. The Senate's Interior and Environment appropriations bill for 2026, for example, provides $41.45 billion in total funding, including $3.27 billion for the National Park Service and $6.17 billion for the Forest Service. It passed out of committee with overwhelming bipartisan support, 26 to 2. The House Interior, Environment and Related Agencies bill, by comparison, provides $38 billion in funding, which is $2.9 billion below the level enacted in 2025. It also includes 72 controversial policy riders that would restrict the issuance of rules to protect sage grouse, prohibit the implementation of an updated public lands rule and dictate the timing of offshore and onshore fossil-fuel extraction leases. The House measure passed out of committee on a partisan 33-28 vote. Rep. Rosa DeLauro (D-Conn.), the ranking member on the House Appropriations Committee, complained last week that bipartisanship has been 'thwarted' on the House side. 'It's not a negotiation,' he said, arguing that the legislation being drafted by Republican House Appropriations Committee Chair Tom Cole (Okla.) 'does not look to being bipartisan in a way that both Democrats and Republicans can come together.' Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) says that Senate Republicans want to avoid a last-minutes standoff with Democrats over funding that could threaten a shutdown. The Senate GOP leader warned in an interview with the Ruthless Podcast that Schumer is unlikely to swallow a partisan funding deal sent over from the House shortly before the Sept. 30 deadline, noting that the Democratic leader 'got just blown up' for voting for the partisan year-long funding bill the House passed in March. 'I think [Democrats are] going to be under an enormous amount of pressure come fall, which is why … we need to do everything we can – House Republicans, Senate Republicans, President Trump and his team – to … set it up for success, to keep the government up and funded,' Thune said. 'And then … Chuck Schumer … what's he going to do? Is he going to bow to the Democratic base, or do the responsible thing and keep the government open? That's the decision,' he added. A Democratic senator who requested anonymity to comment on discussions within the Democratic caucus said that Schumer is coming under heavy pressure from liberal colleagues to insist on a bipartisan funding stopgap. And they're urging him to reject any partisan funding measure akin to what the House jammed the Senate with in March. 'We all want to pursue a bipartisan, bicameral appropriations process. That's how it's always been done successfully and we believe that should happen. However, the Republicans are making it extremely difficult to do that,' Schumer told reporters after meeting with House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries (N.Y.) last week to discuss strategy. Asked what he would do if the House sent another partisan continuing resolution to the Senate shortly before the funding deadline, Schumer said: 'We're for a bipartisan, bicameral bill. That's what's always been done. The onus is on the Republicans to make that happen.' Senate Republicans have heard that message loud and clear and they want to avoid sticking Trump with a shutdown in the fall. An element of the Senate Republican strategy is to pass several of the regular appropriations bills for fiscal year 2026 before the end of September to promote a sense of optimism that Republicans and Democrats can work together to fund the government. GOP senators hope that, in turn, would reduce the temptation for the House to simply send to the Senate a stopgap funding measure that cuts deeply into Democratic priorities, as Johnson did in March, and dare Schumer to shut down the government. By passing a few spending bills this week or in early September, Senate negotiators would be in a better position to insist that House GOP leaders meet them halfway. The Senate voted overwhelmingly Wednesday, 90 to 8, to proceed with its version of the military construction and Department of Veterans Affairs Appropriations bills. Thune is trying to attach to that measure a bill funding the Department of Agriculture and the Food and Drug Administration and another funding the departments of Commerce and Justice, science programs and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. Thune tried to attach the legislative branch appropriations bill to the package but Sen. John Kennedy (R-La.) objected, insisting on the measure getting a stand-alone vote. The Senate will resume voting on nominees Monday while Thune attempts to get all 99 other senators to sign off on a time agreement for expanding the appropriations package beyond military construction and Veterans Affairs. 'We want to get as many bills considered in this tranche as possible,' Thune told reporters last week.
The Hill
6 minutes ago
- The Hill
Republicans stop short of endorsing Trump's call to arrest Obama officials
Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard's document releases about the Obama administration's review of the 2016 election are leading President Trump to call for prosecution of former officials, including his predecessor. But many Republicans in Congress aren't ready to go quite that far. While Trump's GOP supporters in Congress have united in expressing outrage, they have varying ideas of what accountability looks like. And Democrats say the Trump administration is completely misrepresenting the facts while abusing intelligence and the justice system. They also see it as a bid to distract from growing pressure on the White House to release more information about deceased financier and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. The files reveal little new information about Russia's much-studied efforts to influence the 2016 election, but Republicans have nonetheless claimed the intelligence reviews were designed to cast doubt on Trump's victory. The documents do not undercut a central conclusion: that Russia lunched a massive campaign with the hopes of influencing the contest. House GOP leaders are vowing Congress will investigate, but are stopping short of calling for prosecutions, as Trump has, or proposing any tangible consequences for those named in the newly released documents. House Majority Leader Steve Scalise (R-La.) called Gabbard's disclosures 'pretty earth-shattering.' But Scalise declined to call for arrests or prosecutions. 'There needs to be accountability,' Scalise said. 'But now our committees are going to go to work. There's a lot of work to do to find out more …. You follow the evidence wherever it leads, and then if somebody broke laws, you take action. We're at the beginning stages of this. So let's find out where it leads.' Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said on Fox Business Network last week that 'it would appear that laws have been broken by any number of people,' also alluding to congressional action. 'We will use every tool within our arsenal to bring about accountability here. And if we have to create and pioneer new tools, we'll do that as well,' Johnson said. The reaction showcases yet another fracture between congressional Republicans who are normally in lockstep behind Trump — though a much smaller one than the split over files relating to Epstein, which many Republicans have continued to seek despite Trump's calling interest in the matter a 'hoax.' If the administration did pursue charges against Obama, it would likely be hamstrung as a result of Trump's own legal battles. The Supreme Court in 2024 sided with Trump in determining that former presidents retain immunity from criminal prosecution even after they leave office for actions within the scope of their executive power. Further dissection of the limits of that immunity went unexplored when the underlying case was dismissed after Trump's reelection. But Democrats argue the biggest roadblock would be that the GOP claims don't align with the facts — and some are eager for the courts to tell Republicans just that. 'Tulsi Gabbard has leveled some of the most serious charges ever leveled against an American at a former president. Bring charges. Bring charges,' said Rep. Jim Himes (D-Conn.), the top Democrat on the House Intelligence Committee. 'And the reason I want her to bring charges is that there is not a court in the United States that will do anything other than to laugh hysterically over the bulls— that Tulsi Gabbard is peddling right now.' 'They're not dumping documents. They're making up lies,' Himes added. Gabbard earlier this month released a report she said unearths a 'treasonous conspiracy' against Trump when it comes to the 'Russia hoax.' In fact, what she released shows intelligence leaders discussing how the Russians were never able to alter vote tabulations — something that was never in dispute and aligns with what Obama officials said publicly at the time. What intelligence did find, and which several reviews have since backed, was that Russia embarked on a massive social media campaign in the hopes of sowing division in the U.S. Last week, Gabbard released another report, this time a classified review led by Republicans on the House Intelligence Committee. That report cast doubt on whether Russian President Vladimir Putin aimed to aid Trump as opposed to sowing discord within the U.S. (In the process, she infuriated Democrats, who argued she exposed sources and methods for gathering intelligence.) However, a bipartisan Senate Intelligence Committee report, a panel led at the time by now-Secretary of State Marco Rubio, blacked the conclusion Russia favored Trump. 'Moscow's intent was to harm the Clinton Campaign, tarnish an expected Clinton presidential administration, help the Trump Campaign after Trump became the presumptive Republican nominee, and undermine the U.S. democratic process,' that report concluded. Nonetheless, Trump this week said the new files 'have [Obama] stone-cold,' saying he needs to be investigated. 'They tried to rig the election, and they got caught. And there should be very severe consequences for that,' Trump told reporters in the Oval Office last week. On his website Truth Social, Trump posted what appeared to be an AI-generated meme of Obama administration officials — including the former president himself — posing for mug shots in orange jumpsuits. And he shared an AI-generated video of Obama being handcuffed and arrested. Obama's team issued a rare public statement, calling the claims an effort at distraction. 'Our office does not normally dignify the constant nonsense and misinformation flowing out of this White House with a response,' an Obama spokesperson said. 'But these claims are outrageous enough to merit one. These bizarre allegations are ridiculous and a weak attempt at distraction.' Rep. Anna Paulina Luna (R-Fla.) signaled that she would like to see arrests in light of the releases from Gabbard. 'If they don't arrest people, this systemic corruption will just continue,' Luna told The Blaze. In the upper chamber, meanwhile, Sens. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) and John Cornyn (R-Texas) last week called for a special counsel to be appointed, saying there must be 'an immediate investigation of what we believe to be an unprecedented and clear abuse of power by a U.S. presidential administration.' Rep. Ralph Norman (R-S.C.), who is normally a staunch supporter of Trump, said that calls for indictments over Gabbard's releases are 'way too premature.' 'Let the facts determine what happens,' Norman said.
