Latest news with #MaggyKrell
The Herald Scotland
27-06-2025
- Politics
- The Herald Scotland
Men who buy sex don't deserve California's protection
These buyers, the ones who made the demand for human flesh profitable, have operated with near impunity, shielded by stigma that falls harder on victims than perpetrators. AB 379, originally authored by Assemblymember Maggy Krell, D-Sacramento, and now authored by Assemblymember Nick Schultz, D-Burbank, is a historic opportunity to change that. Don't shield men who buy sex Standing in the way are opponents attempting to weaponize the federal government's cruel deportation sweeps and legitimate public fear to weaken this vital legislation. They claim that AB 379's loitering provision should be removed because it would create a new deportable offense. That argument is legally doubtful. Following its recommendation would shield sex buyers statewide at the expense of victims of the sex trade. It also would deprive California of an important tool for getting a handle on the sex trafficking industry. That is not safety nor is it justice. That would be an abdication of lawmakers' responsibility totheir constituents. Opinion: I work with sex trafficking victims. Here's how Diddy's trial could help them. Let us be clear: AB 379 does not target undocumented people or victims in the sex trade. It purposefully targets those who knowingly and willfully seek out vulnerable human beings, some of whom are immigrants themselves, for exploitation through paid rape. It is unconscionable to use the trauma of immigrant families as a political shield for sex buyers - many of whom are affluent White men. And yet, that's what's happening. We were badly abused as victims of sex trafficking This is the truth that the public and our elected officials must face: The sex trade is not "empowerment." On the street, it is almost all the result of trafficking. It is violence, and the buyers are not harmless "johns" - they are predators who rely on the silence of society and the shame of survivors to keep operating freely. Buyers call us names like "meat," "holes," "property," "whore," "slut," "worthless," "slave" and much worse than can be comfortably described here for the everyday reader. We've been choked and strangled, degraded, urinated on, burned, beaten and stabbed. We've been robbed, raped with physical body parts and objects, spit on and laughed at. We've been thrown out of moving vehicles naked and scared, and we've been left for dead on multiple occasions of severe assault. Opinion: A sex trafficking survivor nearly died trying to get out. How she turned her life around. We've been told we were "lucky" anyone would pay for us. We've been told that they could do anything to us and no one would care, that they could kill us and no one would come looking. We were children. Or barely adults. And every name we were called sank into our skin like a scar we still carry. Failing to hold buyers accountable only worsens these harms and creates more demand and need for supply. Opinion alerts: Get columns from your favorite columnists + expert analysis on top issues, delivered straight to your device through the USA TODAY app. Don't have the app? Download it for free from your app store. AB379's reinstatement of the loitering piece for the buyer is not radical. It is justice for everyone being trafficked and abandoned on our streets. To every state senator still on the fence: We are not asking for pity. We are demanding protection, accountability and truth. We're asking you not to forget us just because the politics are complicated. We survived the buyers who raped and abused us, insulted us, filmed us, and discarded us like garbage. Now we are surviving a political process that threatens to discard us yet again. Please don't let that happen. We've come too far. Stay strong, stand with survivors and pass AB 379 intact, and with the survivor-led accountability it was built to deliver. Marjorie Saylor, Ashley Faison-Maddox and Christina Rangel are survivor leaders with lived experience of sex trafficking in California.
USA Today
26-06-2025
- Politics
- USA Today
We survived sex trafficking. Don't protect men who exploit women like us.
California must crack down on predatory sex buyers to stop trafficking. Survivors like us have fought for accountability that reaches not just our traffickers but also men who used us like objects. In May, the California Capitol erupted in acrimonious debate over Assembly Bill 379, a proposal to make purchasing a 16- or 17-year-old for sex punishable as a felony. Now, opponents are trying to weaken a separate, equally important piece of that bill, to make it a misdemeanor to loiter with the intent to purchase commercial sex. California must crack down on predatory sex buyers to stop sex trafficking. For decades, survivors like us have fought for accountability that reaches not just our traffickers, but also the men who bought and used us like objects. These buyers, the ones who made the demand for human flesh profitable, have operated with near impunity, shielded by stigma that falls harder on victims than perpetrators. AB 379, originally authored by Assemblymember Maggy Krell, D-Sacramento, and now authored by Assemblymember Nick Schultz, D-Burbank, is a historic opportunity to change that. Don't shield men who buy sex Standing in the way are opponents attempting to weaponize the federal government's cruel deportation sweeps and legitimate public fear to weaken this vital legislation. They claim that AB 379's loitering provision should be removed because it would create a new deportable offense. That argument is legally doubtful. Following its recommendation would shield sex buyers statewide at the expense of victims of the sex trade. It also would deprive California of an important tool for getting a handle on the sex trafficking industry. That is not safety nor is it justice. That would be an abdication of lawmakers' responsibility totheir constituents. Opinion: I work with sex trafficking victims. Here's how Diddy's trial could help them. Let us be clear: AB 379 does not target undocumented people or victims in the sex trade. It purposefully targets those who knowingly and willfully seek out vulnerable human beings, some of whom are immigrants themselves, for exploitation through paid rape. It is unconscionable to use the trauma of immigrant families as a political shield for sex buyers − many of whom are affluent White men. And yet, that's what's happening. We were badly abused as victims of sex trafficking This is the truth that the public and our elected officials must face: The sex trade is not 'empowerment.' On the street, it is almost all the result of trafficking. It is violence, and the buyers are not harmless 'johns' ‒ they are predators who rely on the silence of society and the shame of survivors to keep operating freely. Buyers call us names like 'meat,' 'holes,' 'property,' 'whore,' 'slut,' 'worthless,' 'slave" and much worse than can be comfortably described here for the everyday reader. We've been choked and strangled, degraded, urinated on, burned, beaten and stabbed. We've been robbed, raped with physical body parts and objects, spit on and laughed at. We've been thrown out of moving vehicles naked and scared, and we've been left for dead on multiple occasions of severe assault. Opinion: A sex trafficking survivor nearly died trying to get out. How she turned her life around. We've been told we were 'lucky' anyone would pay for us. We've been told that they could do anything to us and no one would care, that they could kill us and no one would come looking. We were children. Or barely adults. And every name we were called sank into our skin like a scar we still carry. Failing to hold buyers accountable only worsens these harms and creates more demand and need for supply. AB379's reinstatement of the loitering piece for the buyer is not radical. It is justice for everyone being trafficked and abandoned on our streets. To every state senator still on the fence: We are not asking for pity. We are demanding protection, accountability and truth. We're asking you not to forget us just because the politics are complicated. We survived the buyers who raped and abused us, insulted us, filmed us, and discarded us like garbage. Now we are surviving a political process that threatens to discard us yet again. Please don't let that happen. We've come too far. Stay strong, stand with survivors and pass AB 379 intact, and with the survivor-led accountability it was built to deliver. Marjorie Saylor, Ashley Faison-Maddox and Christina Rangel are survivor leaders with lived experience of sex trafficking in California.
Yahoo
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
After turbulent run, California lawmakers unanimously pass bill on solicitation of minors
The state Assembly on Thursday unanimously passed legislation to strengthen criminal penalties for soliciting 16- and 17-year-olds for sex, a crime measure that set off weeks of political turbulence at the state Capitol. The original author of the bill, Assemblymember Maggy Krell (D-Sacramento), said she wanted to target demand by cracking down on perpetrators as well as increasing protections for victims. Her legislation, in part, would have given prosecutors the ability to charge offenders who buy sex from older teens as a felony or a misdemeanor. Controversy erupted in April when Democrats, after a committee hearing, voted to strip the felony provision out of the bill in cases involving 16- and 17-year-olds. That action created a firestorm of criticism on social media and drew a swift rebuke from Republican lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom. Democrats cut a deal last week amid public pressure, adjusting the penalties to apply only to offenders more than three years older than the victim. "This is our solution to one of the most prevalent problems in the state of California, the exploitation and the trafficking of children," Assemblyman Nick Schultz (D-Burbank), chair of the Assembly Committee on Public Safety, told his colleagues before the vote. Schultz acknowledged that the bill went through a "messy" process, but ultimately will help protect children. The legislation now heads to the state Senate for consideration. Existing law already penalizes solicitation of a minor under 16 as a misdemeanor or felony on the first offense and as a felony on subsequent offenses. During the debate on Thursday, Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo (D-Chatsworth) became emotional while speaking in support of the bill and sharing that as a child she was a victim of sexual abuse. As she paused to collect herself, colleagues gathered around her, and she tearfully described testifying against her predator in court, and then living next door to him in high school after he was released. "This experience continues to shape my views and actions when it comes to protecting children and victims of crime, and it's one of the reasons I will always stand on the side of creating more support for victims and creating accountability for predators," she said. Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins (D-San Diego), who said she supported the bill but hoped for further changes, expressed concerns that the bill criminalizes loitering with the intent to buy sex, arguing that it could be used disproportionately by law enforcement on minorities and the poor. "When laws are vague, they are ripe for profiling," Sharp-Collins said, "and I'm truly worried about Black, brown and the LGBTQIA+ individuals being overly policed and targeted for their mere presence in the area without them actually doing anything criminal." Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
Los Angeles Times
16-05-2025
- Politics
- Los Angeles Times
After turbulent run, California lawmakers unanimously passes bill on solicitation of minors
SACRAMENTO — The state Assembly on Thursday unanimously passed legislation to strengthen criminal penalties for soliciting 16- and -17-year-olds for sex, a crime measure that set off weeks of political turbulence at the state Capitol. The original author of the bill, Assemblymember Maggy Krell (D-Sacramento), said she wanted to target demand by cracking down on perpetrators as well as increasing protections for victims. Her legislation, in part, would have given prosecutors the ability to charge offenders who buy sex from older teens as a felony or a misdemeanor. Controversy erupted in April when Democrats, after a committee hearing, voted to strip the felony provision out of the bill in cases involving 16- and 17-year-old. That action created a firestorm of criticism on social media and drew a swift rebuke from Republican lawmakers and Gov. Gavin Newsom. Democrats cut a deal last week amid public pressure, adjusting the penalties to apply only to offenders more than three years older than the victim. 'This is our solution to one of the most prevalent problems in the state of California, the exploitation and the trafficking of children,' Assemblyman Nick Schultz (D-Burbank), chair of the Assembly Committee on Public Safety, told his colleagues before the vote. Schultz acknowledged that the bill went through a 'messy' process, but ultimately will help protect children. The legislation now heads to the state Senate for consideration. Existing law already penalizes solicitation of a minor under 16 as a misdemeanor or felony on the first offense and as a felony on subsequent offenses. During the debate on Thursday, Assemblymember Pilar Schiavo (D-Chatsworth) became emotional while speaking in support of the bill and sharing that as child she was victim of sexual abuse. As she paused to collect herself, colleagues gathered around her, and she tearfully described testifying against her predator in court, and then living next door to him in high school after he was released. 'This experience continues to shape my views and actions when it comes to protecting children and victims of crime, and it's one of the reasons I will always stand on the side of creating more support for victims and creating accountability for predators,' she said. Assemblymember LaShae Sharp-Collins (D-San Diego), who said she supported the bill but hoped for further changes, expressed concerns that the bill criminalizes loitering with the intent to buy sex, arguing that it could be used disproportionately by law enforcement on minorities and the poor. 'When laws are vague, they are ripe for profiling,' Sharp-Collins said, 'and I'm truly worried about Black, brown and the LGBTQIA+ individuals being overly policed and targeted for their mere presence in the area without them actually doing anything criminal.'
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Sex trafficking is covered in California. More laws are not the answer
In this era of culture war politics, the importance of law has diminished significantly. Instead of being crafted to create balance for our society, laws are being used as ammo for political games. I've thought a lot about this issue since reading a book by Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch, 'Over Ruled: The Human Toll of Too Much Law.' In it, Gorsuch explains how, in the last generation, America has become a law-obsessed nation, to the detriment of everyday Americans. Opinion 'Some law is essential to our lives and our freedoms,' the book tells us. 'But too much law can place those very same freedoms at risk and even undermine respect for law itself. And often those who feel the cost most acutely are those without wealth, power and status.' Gorsuch, and his collaborator, Janie Nitzie, tell us that there are 60,000 pages of American law, which amounts to 3 million words. They rightly ask: Have we gone too far? I thought of that for the last two weeks, as Sacramento was consumed by Assembly Bill 375, which sought to toughen penalties for the crime of solicitation of minors and support survivors of abuse. Written by Sacramento-area Assemblymember Maggy Krell, AB 379 gives the impression of filling a void in California by creating more laws to punish those who solicit underage people. But the California Penal Code is full of laws to crack down on sex trafficking and prostitution. Specifically, CPC 288.3 gives judges the discretion to sentence someone to jail who is charged with attempting to communicate with a minor. It also states that the person could be charged for indirect or direct communication with he victim, something that Krell's bill seeks to address. Just last year, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed four laws to address human trafficking. They covered increasing penalties for traffickers to giving hospitals tools to identify victims. So, with the presence of laws on the books to confront human trafficking, why do we need more laws? Why do we need AB 375? The Sacramento Bee's opinion team is hard at work sifting through the chaos so you don't have to. Get our weekly Bee Opinionated newsletter straight to your inbox and we'll help you cut through the drone of the news cycle. In his book, Gorsuch documents the consequences people have experienced because of the American obsession with creating too many laws. One situation that stood out to me was a fisherman who had federal agents inspect his boat and the fish he caught. The man was arrested initially for catching undersized fish in the Gulf of Mexico, and later on, charged with fraud under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, a 2002 federal law that penalizes record-keeping and reporting. The commercial fisherman was allegedly playing fast and loose with the size of his catch. He was convicted, but that decision was later reversed by the U.S. Supreme Court. To make matters worse, after spending thousands of dollars on lawyers to fight his jail time, the federal government ultimately changed the law, which would've allowed him to go free. Frankly, America doesn't know how to reconcile with its past, especially when it comes to law. Let's say AB 379 passes. What if it led to people being wrongfully convicted and put into jail because of this law? California could write an apology and reform the law, but that wouldn't do anything for the lives of people negatively affected. I don't know Krell, but it seems she put her fellow Democrats in a bad place. They wanted to move slowly, to have a hearing this autumn to make sure AB 379 would not result in a felony conviction for someone who was not trafficking a 16- or 17-year-old, but was convicted anyway. Krell is not some sinister politician. She is a career prosecutor using her expertise for what she believes is the right solution to human trafficking. But in the current climate of government, there is an obsession to create more laws to protect more people while forgetting that more laws also hurt more people. Krell wants to believe that AB 379 would only have consequences for the worst in us. She should have listened to her colleagues who worried about the unintended consequences of her bill if it were applied too broadly. She refused and created a situation where her party got trashed by the lawmaking obsession that Gorsuch wrote about. What was wrong with the laws already in place?
