What to know about California's fight over harsher penalties for soliciting sex from older teens
SACRAMENTO, Calif. (AP) — A debate over whether to create harsher penalties for soliciting and buying sex from 16- and 17-year-olds exploded in the California Legislature this week.
Republicans and some moderate Democrats were pushing for a new tool to help law enforcement go after those who solicit older minors for sex. But some said they worried the measure could be misused and weaponized by parents upset about interracial or LGBTQ+ relationships to target older teens involved in relationships.
The issue came to a head Thursday after Republicans in the Assembly argued for the policy on the floor. Democrats overwhelmingly rejected the effort but vowed to bring a new proposal to address the issue.
Here's what to know:
How does current law protect 16- and 17-year-olds?
Under current law, contacting a person under 18 to engage in sexual activity in California is a felony. So are crimes like soliciting a child who is a victim of human trafficking, sexting a minor and engaging in sex with a minor if the age gap between the parties is more than three years.
It's also a 'serious' crime in California to traffic minors. Anyone convicted of at least three "serious" felonies in California faces a sentence of between 25 years and life in prison under the 'three strikes law.'
'California leads the nation with some of the toughest laws against trafficking,' said Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, a Democrat.
What changes are proposed?
Those who are 16 or 17 years old were not included in bipartisan legislation on sex trafficking signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom last year. The law, which took effect this year, allows prosecutors to charge those who solicit and buy sex from minors 15 or younger with a felony. It left in place an existing law that limits the penalty for soliciting older teens to a misdemeanor.
Assemblymember Maggy Krell, a Democrat with a background as a prosecutor, wanted to expand the law Newsom signed to include older teens. Children under 18 who are bought for sex are considered victims of human trafficking under federal law and should receive the same protection under California law, she said.
'If you're 17 years old on the street corner and an old man comes up and purchases you for sex, that's rape,' Krell said. 'That should be treated as a felony.'
Why do some Democrats oppose the change?
Democrats on the Assembly Public Safety Committee amended Krell's bill to drop the provision that would make it a felony to solicit and buy sex from older teens. They agreed with Krell's goal but worried the approach could have unintended consequences.
Leigh LaChapelle of the Coalition to Abolish Slavery & Trafficking told lawmakers at a hearing that the policy could be used to target 16- and 17-year-olds who are in relationships with other minors.
'They are worried about the way that the criminal legal system can be utilized by parents who are upset about interracial and LGBTQ relationships," LaChapelle said.
During Thursday's legislative debate, Democrats said it's important to give prosecutors the discretion to decide on penalties in these cases.
Newsom, first partner Jennifer Siebel Newsom and Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis criticized the committee's actions.
'The law should treat all sex predators who solicit minors the same — as a felony, regardless of the intended victim's age. Full stop,' Newsom's office said in a statement. He rarely comments on pending legislation.
What happens next?
Several moderate Democrats, including Krell, broke with their party Thursday to vote with Republicans. Democrats instead backed an amendment saying they plan to 'adopt the strongest laws to protect 16- and 17-year-old victims.'
Assemblymember Nick Schultz, who chairs the public safety committee, said he's committed to bringing a new proposal on the issue forward this year.
'We will have a solution,' Schultz said. 'That's my commitment.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Reports: Virginia Democrats outdoing Republicans in raising campaign contributions
Democratic House of Delegates hopeful Kimberly Pope Adams raised the second-highest amount in Virginia of contributions to House campaigns for the latest campaign reporting period, according to the nonpartisan Virginia Public Access Project. Pope Adams, who has already locked up the Democratic nomination in the 82nd House District, reported a total of $262,048 in money raised for the April 1-June 5 window, based on data from the Virginia Department of Elections that was compiled by VPAP. That trailed only House Speaker Don Scott of Portsmouth, who raised just over $344,000 for the period. Political watchers were keeping a close eye on this round of reports, the last before the crucial June 17 party primaries across Virginia. Like Pope Adams, Scott already has the Democratic nod sewn up. He also does not appear to have any GOP opposition this year. The only House primary next week in the Tri-City area is in District 75 where three Democrats are vying to oppose Republican incumbent Carrie Coyner. In that contest, Lindsey Dougherty continues to outdistance Dustin Wade and Stephen Miller-Pitts. For the reporting period, Dougherty raised $171,695, compared to $136,276 for Wade and $4,471 for Miller-Pitts. As of June 5, Wade showed more than $100,000 in cash on hand over Dougherty and five times more than Miller-Pitts. VPAP reported Dougherty raising the sixth-highest amount of contributions for the period, and Wade the 12th. Dougherty and Miller-Pitts ran against Coyner in the 2019 and 2023 elections, respectively. The 75th District covers all of Hopewell and portions of Chesterfield and Prince George counties. More: The primary menu for June 17: Heavy on the state races and a first time for Petersburg In the 82nd District [Petersburg, Surry County, portions of Dinwiddie and Prince George], Pope Adams continues to run away from GOP incumbent Kim Taylor in campaign contributions. For the latest reporting period, Pope Adams' total was more than four times that of Taylor, who listed receiving $64,489 in donations. Her cash-on-hand amount of $289,468 was eight times more than Taylor's $34,502. The race is a rerun of 2023's race, one of the top three most expensive contests in recent Virginia political history. Taylor squeaked out a victory over Pope Adams by only 53 votes following a recount, and Democrats are clocking the 2025 race as pivotal in holding their slim majority in the House for the next two years. Pope Adams' contributions included $25,000 from the Clean Virginia Fund on April 23, $7,500 from the Jane Fonda Climate PAC on May 14, and three $5,000 donations from Elizabeth Simons on May 29, The Next 50 PAC on April 30 and Fund Her PAC on April 29. Taylor's largest contributions for the period were $20,000 from the Dominion Energy PAC on May 8, $10,000 from the Wren Williams for Delegate campaign on April 24, and identical $7,500 amounts from Friends of Scott Wyatt on April 2 and Chris Runion for Delegate on June 5. The reports indicate Taylor getting three donations of $100 or less, and Pope Adams receiving 1,461. More: House GOP incumbent lauds endorsement from local Democratic group. Democrats cry 'foul' In the 75th District primary, Dougherty received two contributions totaling $80,000 from the super PAC Secure Progress and $35,000 from the campaign of Democratic Del. Dan Helmer. Wade's top donations were $5,000 from himself and two donations from Anita Thurston totaling $4,500. Miller-Pitts' sole contribution of over $100 for the period was $250 from Rhonda Clanton-Davis. Coyner, a Republican seeking her fourth term in the House, received $69,056 in contributions over the period. Her largest donations were $10,000 from Carolyn Williams, $7,500 from Strong Start PAC, and three of $5,000 each from Thomas McInerney, Vision Management Services, and Clean Virginia Fund. Records indicate her having $315,350 in cash on hand as of June 5. The district traditionally leans Republican. Coyner has won re-election with as much as 55% of the vote, but Democrats still target her as vulnerable. In Petersburg, history is being made with the first-ever Democratic primary for the constitutional officer Commissioner of the Revenue. Incumbent Brittani Flowers is being challenged by Mary 'Liz Stith' Howard for the right to be the Democrat on the November ballot. Five years ago, the Virginia General Assembly voted to allow any local-office candidate [except School Board] to seek official party backing. The law went into effect last year, as Petersburg Vice Mayor Darrin Hill received the Democratic nomination for his Ward 2 seat by acclimation. The commissioner primary is the first contested one in Petersburg. Campaign records show Flowers receiving just shy of $3,000 in contributions for the reporting period. Her largest donations were $500 from former state Senate candidate Waylin Ross and $300 from Bernard Flowers Jr. Howard did not record any contributions for the reporting period. Petersburg City Councilor Marlow Jones, who is running as an independent for Virginia's lieutenant governor, raised $700 in donations during the latest reporting period. Five hundred dollars came from three contributions of more than $100. The remaining $200 was split among five contributions of less than $100. To see the latest donation data for any race this year, click on the VPAP website. Bill Atkinson (he/him/his) is an award-winning journalist who covers breaking news, government and politics. Reach him at batkinson@ or on X (formerly known as Twitter) at @BAtkinson_PI. This article originally appeared on The Progress-Index: Virginia primary 2025: Campaign finance reports show money pouring in
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
House to vote on repealing DC local laws on noncitizen voting, policing, immigration enforcement
The Brief House Republicans are voting on three bills that would override D.C. laws on noncitizen voting rights, limiting police powers, and restricting immigration enforcement cooperation. One bill, HR 884, repeals D.C.'s 2022 law allowing noncitizens to vote in local elections. HR 2056 would dismantle D.C.'s sanctuary city protections by mandating cooperation with federal immigration authorities. WASHINGTON - The House of Representatives are voting Tuesday on three Republican-backed bills that would override several local D.C. laws. The bills would roll back D.C. efforts expand voting rights for non-citizens, restrict police and force the District to work with immigration enforcement efforts on a federal level. D.C. passed the Local Resident Voting Rights Amendment Act in 2022, granting noncitizens in D.C. the right to vote in local elections. That includes mayoral races, D.C. Council positions, attorney general, ANC members, attorney general and D.C. ballot measures. Noncitizens can also run for elected office in the D.C. government. HR 884 would repeal the act, removing voting powers from noncitizens. Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton released a statement, pushing back at Congress' power of local D.C. matters. "Last Congress, Republicans introduced 14 bills or amendments to prohibit noncitizens from voting in D.C. or to repeal, nullify or prohibit the carrying out of D.C.'s law that permits noncitizens to vote," said Norton. "Yet, Republicans refuse to make the only election law change D.C. residents have asked Congress to make, which is the right to hold elections for voting members of the House and Senate." The Protecting Our Nation's Capital Emergency Act, would dismantle parts of D.C.'s Comprehensive Policing and Justice Reform Amendment Act of 2022. HR 2096 would allow D.C. police officers to negotiate disciplinary matters through collective bargaining. It would also restore a statute of limitation for claims against the Metropolitan Police Department. "This bill was introduced three days after House Republicans passed a continuing resolution that cut D.C.'s local budget by one billion dollars. That act of fiscal sabotage, which did not save the federal government any money, has led to a freeze on overtime, hiring and pay raises, and furloughs or layoffs may be next," said Norton. "Nine weeks ago today, the Senate passed the D.C. Local Funds Act to reverse the cut. The D.C. Local Funds Act is just sitting in the House. Like President Trump and the National Fraternal Order of Police, I call on the House to pass immediately the D.C. Local Funds Act." READ MORE: Congress' spending bill error leaves DC scrambling to cut $400M from budget HR 2056 would strike down D.C. policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement. It would prohibit DC officials from "sending, receiving, maintaining, or exchanging with any Federal, State, or local government entity information regarding the citizenship or immigration status (lawful or unlawful) of any individual." The bill would effectively dismantle D.C.'s sanctuary city policies. D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser made moves to quietly overturn a law that prevents local police from cooperating with ICE, including it in a provision of her 2026 budget proposal. Big picture view The D.C. Home Rule Act of 1973 allows the city to elect its own mayor and council. It's also allowed for D.C. to choose Advisory Neighborhood Commissioners to handle community concerns. Congress still maintains control over D.C., including the ability to review all local legislation and appoint the city's judges. D.C. has no voting member in Congress, though it has a nonvoting Delegate. In February, legislators from Utah and Tennessee introduced a bill to strip D.C. of its ability to govern itself. The bill is named after D.C.'s Mayor Muriel Bowser – the "Bringing Oversight to Washington and Safety to Every Resident (BOWSER) Act." The bill would eliminate D.C. Home Rule Act of 1973 and would place D.C. under the full control of Congress. The Source This story includes information from the US House of Representatives, Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton, and previous FOX 5 DC reporting.
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Federal immigration raid at Omaha food production plant sparks protests
OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — Immigration authorities raided at least one Omaha food production plant Tuesday morning, inspiring some small protests, but details about how many workers were affected weren't immediately clear. Omaha police and the Douglas County sheriff said immigration officials had warned them about their plans, and their departments helped block off traffic around the neighborhood where many food production plants are located while U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement officers worked. ICE officials didn't immediately respond to questions. Meatpacking plants rely heavily on immigrant workers who are willing to do the physically demanding work. The industry has not yet been the focus of President Donald Trump's immigration enforcement efforts, but the administration has been intensifying its efforts in recent weeks. Trump called out the National Guard this week to respond to ongoing protests in Los Angeles over his immigration policies. In Omaha, a small group of people came out to protest the raids, and some of them even jumped on the front bumper of a vehicle to try to stop officers. Glenn Valley Foods officials didn't immediately respond to an inquiry from The Associated Press, but WOWT reported that CEO and owner Gary Rohwer said he wasn't made aware of the operation ahead of time and that there was no warrant. 'Of course not. It's a raid,' said Rohwer, whose company makes the Gary's QuickSteak brand of ready-to-grill steak. Federal agents entered the plant around 9 a.m. Tuesday with a list of 97 people they wanted to screen, Rohwer said. He said the company regularly checks the immigration status of employees with the federal E-Verify database. The raids prompted one Douglas County Commissioner to walk out in the middle of a meeting Tuesday to head down to the area he represents in southeast Omaha where the plants are located. Commissioner Roger Garcia and City Councilman Ron Hug both expressed concern about the impact of the raids on families. 'These actions are deeply harmful to the South Omaha community,' Hug said in a statement. 'Not only are they unjust and disruptive, but they also directly undermine the economic stability and growth of District 4 and the broader community.' Douglas County Sheriff Aaron Hanson said his agency is 'not privy to the exact nature of the ICE operation' but that his agency is there to assist with assuring 'peace and safety' of everyone in the area. Asked when he learned of the operation, he said his department received 'respectful and ample notification.' He says he got the notification about a week ago. Margery A. Beck And Josh Funk, The Associated Press Sign in to access your portfolio