Update: Lawsuit Challenges Prostitution Law: ESPLER Project Inc.

[DaveinPhoenix]

Update: Lawsuit Challenges Prostitution Law: ESPLER Project Inc.

State of California Attorney General Notice and Motion to Dismiss

A 206-page response has been made to the declaratory action to strike down the prostitution law, and motion to dismiss is what I expected. The fight is on!

Most of the response is exhibits full of the crap about sex trafficking, Melissa Farley's bogus research about the harms of prostitution to women and how the prostitution laws protect women from abuse.

Of course, probably 90%+ of sexwork has nothing to do with any coerced sex trafficking but is between consenting adults in private.

Next Important Dates:

June 8 ? Deadline for plaintiffs to respond to the motion to dismiss

June 23 ? Deadline for defendants to reply

August 7 ? Hearing on motion to dismiss (9:00 a.m. in Courtroom #5, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, 2nd floor, Judge Jeffrey S. White)

If the State of California wins on the motion to dismiss, it may benefit the cause since it will get the case to the 9th Circuit more quickly.

Link: 206 page California AG Notice and Motion http://www.sexwork.com/CalfAGMotion.pdf

This is a large 6.3mb file so may take awhile to download.

Link: Complaint For Declaratory Judgement filed by Erotic Service Providers Legal Education & Research Project

http://phxlist.com/forum/attachment.php?aid=685

Much more extensive information at

http://www.esplerp.org

Edited May 12, 2015 by Kaduk
content

[Bit Banger]

Thank you, Dave, for keeping on top of this & keeping us informed.

[Guest Anton Chigurh]

Of course, probably 90%+ of sexwork has nothing to do with any coerced sex trafficking but is between consenting adults in private.

While I'm all for sex work being legalized, I believe this statement is wildly vague, misleading and inaccurate. If an organization or individual is promoting the legalization of prostitution I think they'd be wise to focus on how that legalization could greatly reduce trafficking and forced prostitution instead of making blanket statements like this.

If I'm wrong I'll be glad to admit it but please share the resources that brought you to this conclusion.

Edited May 11, 2015 by Anton Chigurh
punctuation

[rachelsonoma]

State of California Attorney General Notice and Motion to Dismiss has been filed by 3 women who want to be sex workers, and a disabled man who wants to access the services of sex workers.

A 206-page response has been made to the declaratory action to strike down the prostitution law, and motion to dismiss is what I expected. The fight is on!

Next Important Dates:

June 8 ? Deadline for plaintiffs to respond to the motion to dismiss

June 23 ? Deadline for defendants to reply

August 7 ? Hearing on motion to dismiss (9:00 a.m. in Courtroom #5, 1301 Clay Street, Oakland, 2nd floor, Judge Jeffrey S. White)

It has not been easy to raise money to pay the attorneys for this historic legal challenge. After being kicked off of GOFUNDME, A second crowdfunding campaign is now underway to raise an additional $30,000 this year to cover further legal fees. Supporters can contribute to this historic effort to decriminalize prostitution in California at https://liberatetoemancipate.tilt.com/liberatetoemancipate

[DaveinPhoenix]

huh?

Looks like my more detailed post has hijacked and changed.

The first sentence makes no sense. NO it wasn't filed by 3 women in the motion to dismiss.

The changing my post and treating is yours is simply not accurate.

[DaveinPhoenix]

The correct post on the challenge to the prostitution law is in the general discussion section

[DaveinPhoenix]

"Real" forced prostitution is very rare. Remember under the Federal Acts (travel and trafficking)- consenting adults IS "Trafficking". Under the Trafficking Act if it is coerced than it is "extreme trafficking" with longer prison terms.

In Arizona and most States, a boyfriend or husband who drives the escort to dates is a pimp and trafficker. As is any phone person.

We have many International and U.S. cases (the current A&E "8 minutes" for example have made up stories that have been exposed that have casts to pretend to be trafficked.

The victim industrial complex is bringing in many hundreds of $millions of funding which goes out to police agencies (and big payrolls of the organizations) to promote the trafficking agenda. It is big money and makes great political points to think they are "rescuing" so many helpless women who in truth do not need or want rescuing. I have the non-profit financial filing of many of these "save them" organizations. Lots of the funding is coming from the Hunt sisters (as in oil), Disney and in Phoenix Sen McCain's wife's foundation.

In Phoenix, we had the twice a year "Project Rose" round ups to go arrest hundreds of workers off ads to be their pretend victims. Go to the Church hooker fair and be "saved" or go to jail for prostitution. Often this was simply by having GFE or other terms in ads which is solicitation of prostitution.

In Arizona anyone who "encourages or assists" is a trafficker. All the local Phoenix boards have shut down due to the legal risks as have some of the national boards (naughty etc) since website owners who have reviews and ads may be traffickers.

Maybe a roundup of 100 uncovered 1 case of a "real" victim.

If LE would spent their time, police and huge court resources going after the maybe 10% of actual real coerced cases or underaged that would be great. But in private consenting adults which are most of the arrests do not need to be their pretend victims of trafficking.

[Guest]

Aloha and Good morning Dave

I've been keeping tabs on this suit as well as the changes to the SAVE ACT which has already passed the House and is in the Judiciary committee of the Senate.

I may be in South Florida, yet I'm doing my best to keep informed of the climate, politically and share information. A lot of changes are coming and I'm not sure many are prepared.

Aloha from 90? Florida

[slim jim]

Heidi, thanks for keeping abreast with the coming changes but I missed the post which explains the exact changes and how they will effect the us as a whole community.

Legalization is fine but than comes regulation which will become the bigger picture.

You are correct no one is prepared for that can of worms to be opened.

Time will Tell

Sj

[Guest]

Heidi, thanks for keeping abreast with the coming changes but I missed the post which explains the exact changes and how they will effect the us as a whole community.

Legalization is fine but than comes regulation which will become the bigger picture.

You are correct no one is prepared for that can of worms to be opened.

Time will Tell

Sj

I don't believe anyone has posted, including myself as I'm not a legal authority nor host advertising, reviews, etc.. The BILL is about further enforcement of regulation 2257.

I'm very curious how California WILL fare as I'm on the Decriminalize side, not Legalization.

[The Oxymoron]

Dave in Phoenix is NOT a credible source of information and TOB is not going to be used as a vehicle for his drama and bs, sorry.