Utah declares war on human trafficking with new legislation
'Human trafficking is a serious offense, and it involves coercing someone into forced labor or sexual acts, and in essence, it's modern-day slavery,' Rep. Candice B. Pierucci, R-Herriman, said during her bill's first House floor debate last month.
'Unfortunately, Utah lags severely behind other states in the prosecution of human trafficking.'
Now passed by both the House and Senate, HB405, if signed by Gov. Spencer Cox, will increase penalties for certain human trafficking offenses in the state.
Under current law, the human trafficking of a child is a first-degree felon but with a five-year minimum sentence; Pierucci's bill would make it 10. It would likewise change human trafficking for sexual exploitation from a second-degree felony to a first-degree felony, no matter the age of the victim.
It also alters the enhancement for aggravated human trafficking and labor trafficking up to a first-degree level felony.
'This is a very serious issue,' she said. 'We've talked about some of the horrific impacts of having a porous border over the past four years, and this is an issue that our state and the country as a whole is trying to wrap its hands around.'
During her presentation at the House Judiciary Committee meeting, Pierucci revealed that in 2020, over half of all sex trafficking survivors were undocumented in the United States. She noted that in one study, most victims reported being recruited for both sex and labor trafficking, with 75% holding an unknown immigration status. Another study showed that 60% of Latin American children who attempt to cross the border alone or with smugglers are captured by cartels and exploited in child pornography or drug trafficking.
Though the bill passed on Wednesday, lawmakers from both parties expressed concern about the five-year increase in minimum sentencing.
'I've seen these mandatory minimums sometimes sweep up people who really don't deserve the mandatory minimum,' said Derrin R. Owens, R-Fountain Green. 'Our job as a legislature is to set policy to say, 'Yes, we do think these are very serious crimes worthy of very serious punishment,' but then we let a judge and a jury decide how that law should apply to the facts before them.'
Current U.S. state minimum prison sentences for child sex trafficking and labor trafficking:
Utah: Sex trafficking — 5 years. Labor trafficking — 1 year.
Georgia: Sex trafficking — 25 years. Labor trafficking — 10 years.
Oklahoma: Sex trafficking — 15 years. Labor trafficking — 5 years.
Missouri: Sex trafficking — 10 years. Labor trafficking — 5 years.
During the Senate flooring discussion on Wednesday, Sen. Todd D. Weiler, R-Woods Cross, stated that although he did not oppose the bill, he wanted to clarify that offenders are rarely released after serving minimum sentences.
'Despite low minimum sentences, the effects of being trafficked for the victims are lifelong,' the bill's floor sponsor, Sen. Heidi Balderree, R-Saratoga Springs, said in response.
In response to the same concerns during the House floor debate, Pierucci said she would serve 25 years if she could.
'At the very least, we are moving the needle and enhancing this to a first-degree felony with no less than 10 years in prison,' she said. 'And the goal, the hope, (and) the message is one: Utah will stop lagging behind the rest of the country in how we charge these things. But also, the message should go out: do not try this in Utah. We take it seriously, and we will make sure you are locked up for a very long time.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Indianapolis Star
27 minutes ago
- Indianapolis Star
Indiana's U.S. House members can pay for flyers with taxpayer dollars. Here's who spent the most
The messages arrive in Hoosier mailboxes. They pop up as text messages, emails and television or radio commercials. Others show up as billboards in Northwest Indiana or newspaper ads in Richmond. "Congresswoman Spartz has also been working with President Trump and DOGE to eliminate waste, fraud, and abuse, and codify their findings," reads text on a March postal mailer from U.S. Rep. Victoria Spartz's office. "Under Biden's policies, millions of illegal aliens entered our country," a separate December 2024 text from U.S. Rep. Jim Baird reads. These congressional communications to Hoosiers aren't political messages from campaigns. Instead they are paid for through members' allowances, which are funded by taxpayers. Both past and present members in Indiana's U.S. House delegation have taken advantage of this centuries-old congressional privilege known as franking, which allows members to send unsolicited mail or share communications, like text messages or emails, with constituents. U.S. Senators can disseminate franked materials, too, but there are different rules and Indiana's senators over the last 10 years have not used it. Indiana's nine House members since 2020 have annually spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on just franked mail items, according to quarterly House financial disbursement reports reviewed by IndyStar. That isn't a full picture of their spending, though, because that number doesn't include any additional money spent on text messages or billboards. They typically spend more during election years despite rules requiring 60-day blackout periods with no office communications before elections. While the core purpose of franking is to communicate with Hoosiers, it has also been viewed as a controversial privilege. The ability to regularly send messages to constituents on taxpayer dimes provides an advantage to incumbents over election challengers, experts say. Plus, while a bipartisan House group reviews and approves materials, the rules on franking allow representatives to disseminate political critiques and messages that can sometimes appear like campaign ads. In Indiana, where congressional primaries are typically the more competitive races, a politically relevant advertisement or mail piece from a congressional office can widen the recognition gap between an incumbent and potential competitors, experts said. In some cases, photos included in franked materials can also provide a recognition boost to a representative's family members. "Everyone's trying to get their name out and there's a lot of noise to break through," said Mike Wolf, the chair of the Mike Downs Center for Indiana Politics at Purdue University Fort Wayne. "Members of Congress, at any chance they can, need to do that." U.S. Rep. Victoria Spartz, who had the tightest primary election in Indiana during the most recent cycle, disclosed the most spending on franked mail in both 2023 and 2024 of any Hoosier in Congress, enabling her to use taxpayer dollars to remind voters of her priorities. The costs of sending franked materials are reported in the House's quarterly disbursement reports, which shows records of how members used their allowances. In 2024, Indiana's House delegation collectively spent more than $600,000 on franked mail to Hoosiers. Digital communications or advertisements also cost money but, because they are not categorized the same as mail, they're harder to identify in the quarterly disbursement reports. For example, U.S. Rep. Erin Houchin submitted 50 advisory opinion requests for franked materials in 2024, the most of Indiana's House members. But Houchin's requests were largely for text messages to constituents. Members of Indiana's delegation received between about $1.8 million and $1.95 million in member allowances last year to cover franking and other office expenses. The biggest spenders on franked mail in 2024, according to the reports, were Spartz, Baird and Democratic U.S. Rep. Frank Mrvan, who all cracked six figures. Spartz in 2024 reported spending $196,000 on franked mail with Baird spending nearly $174,000 and Mrvan spending $104,000, according to an IndyStar review of the financial reports. (A spokesperson for Spartz told IndyStar the actual spend was higher, but did not respond to a question as of press time about the discrepancy between the two numbers.) "Our office budgets approximately $300k annually to send three-four quarterly update mailers to stay in touch with our constituency, with the Q4 annual update mailer size adjusted based on available funds," the spokesperson said. "We generally provide updates on constituent services, town halls, and key policy developments in D.C." U.S. Rep. André Carson, a Democrat, and former Republican U.S. Reps. Jim Banks, Greg Pence and Larry Bucshon in 2024 all spent less than $1,000 on franked mail. Pence and Bucshon did not seek reelection in 2024 and Banks successfully ran for U.S. Senate. Before a text message arrives on someone's phone or a newsletter in someone's inbox, representatives must get those materials approved by the House Communications Standards Commission. This bipartisan group signs off on franked communications and issues advisory opinions to ensure the materials follow House rules on restrictions like timing and content of the materials. Franking is a bipartisan affair in Indiana. But the content and type of materials released to Hoosiers between 2024 and the first seven months of 2025 largely depends on the member of Congress directing the messages, according to an IndyStar review of submitted materials. The current delegation for the 119th Congress has submitted 82 requests for advisory opinions to the House Communications Standards Commission between Jan. 1 and July 31, which span from texts to emails to mailers. Franked materials by Indiana's seven Republican members at times contained more political messaging, but they still were approved for distribution by the bipartisan House Communications Standards Commission. In 2025, most of the communication from Indiana's Republicans included supportive messages about President Donald Trump's agenda, including the 'One Big Beautiful Bill.' Who represents Indiana in Congress: Who represents Indiana in Congress? Who you need to know and how to contact them In 2024, though, many of the materials sent by Republicans criticized the Biden administration and former President Kamala Harris. For example, U.S. Rep. Rudy Yakym sent a postal and digital mailer to constituents in the 2nd Congressional District about his vote to impeach former Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas. The postal mailer features a large grainy photo of Mayorkas alongside a headline about Yakym's impeachment vote. 'Every state—including Indiana— has become a border state under Secretary Mayorkas' tenure,' Yakym is quoted in the mailer. 'My vote to impeach Secretary Mayorkas is an important step in holding the Biden Administration accountable and ensuring we end this crisis and stand up for America's sovereignty by restoring Law and Order to the southern border.' Yakym's mailer was approved in February 2024 under a provision of federal code that allows elected officials to tell the public about "matters of public concern" from a past or current session of Congress. 'Impeachment, for example, that's an action of Congress,' said Danielle Caputo, senior legal counsel with the Campaign Legal Center. 'They're allowed to talk about that and their perspective on what they did and why it matters to their district.' Members from both parties have also spent dollars on billboards in past years. Both Mrvan in 2024 and Baird in 2023 and 2024 submitted advisory opinion requests for billboards advertising their congressional offices in their districts. Materials shared in 2024 by Indiana's two Democrats, Mrvan and Carson, featured fairly tame political messaging. In addition to billboards, Mrvan in 2024 sent mailers to constituents about his legislative actions, including support for law enforcement. Carson in 2024 released a television ad about his support for former President Joe Biden's bipartisan infrastructure law and another on how to apply for a service academy through his office. Mrvan has yet to submit requests for advisory opinions on franked messages in 2025 while Carson prepared radio ads for a youth job fair held in March. Just as they did in the 18th century, franked materials do serve a purpose for Indiana's elected officials, who seek to inform the public about actions in Washington, D.C. "The original basis of the frank was very simple," said Matt Glassman, a professor with the Government Affairs Institute at Georgetown University. "Members of Congress need to communicate with their constituents, and in 1795 had to be able to write letters to people and post things and tell them what was going on. That's still an important service, right? Getting the message out about what's going on in Congress, how you voted, is a public service." While the rules for what they can spend taxpayer money on allows a vast amount of options to be shared with their constituents, ethics experts told IndyStar it's worth it for members to consider if their message helps the broad spectrum of people that live in their district. 'All of those individuals, regardless of their politics, regardless of who they voted for are legally represented by this elected member of Congress," said Donald Sherman, the executive vice president and chief counsel for Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington. "So I think mailers should be written with them in mind, not just catered to a Republican primary voter or a swing voter.' Contact IndyStar state government and politics reporter Brittany Carloni at
Indianapolis Star
27 minutes ago
- Indianapolis Star
4 ways Indiana's U.S. House members used taxpayer dollars to communicate with Hoosiers
Hoosiers in Indiana's U.S. House delegation regularly use a centuries-old congressional privilege known as franking to communicate with their constituents. Franked material can look like informational fliers that might land in someone's mailbox, but you might also see them as billboards, radio commercials or text messages. They are paid for through a House member's congressional allowance, which is funded by taxpayers. (You can typically identify franked material by language, often in small print, that states 'Paid for by official funds authorized by the House of Representatives.') What franked material Hoosiers might see largely depends on who their representative is and what message that elected official wants to share. Here are some examples of what Republicans and Democrats in Indiana's House delegation have sent through franking. Both Republicans and Democrats have used their congressional allowances to pay for billboards in their districts in recent years. Between 2023 and 2024, the House Communications Standards Commission approved three different billboards for U.S. Rep. Jim Baird, each one ranging in political messaging. In one case, a simple sign refers passersby to Baird's congressional website and says he is 'bringing Hoosier values to Congress.' Another billboard declares Baird 'A Conservative Patriot in Congress" with checkmarks above text that says "Defending the 2nd Amendment," "Voting for a secure border," and "Cutting wasteful spending." U.S. Rep. Frank Mrvan also got approval twice in 2024 to pay for billboards in the 1st Congressional District in Northwest Indiana. '1st District Congressman Frank J. Mrvan, Here to Serve You,' reads the text submitted by Mrvan's office. It's not easy to pinpoint the exact amount Baird and Mrvan spent on the billboards, but House disbursement records show Baird collectively paid just over $23,000 to billboard advertiser Lamar and just over $8,000 to Reagan Outdoor Advertising around the time Baird's billboards were approved in 2023 and 2024. Disbursement records from early 2024 show Mrvan paid four $5,000 payments to Lamar between January and July. Both parties also used franking privileges to send mail to constituents. But the content of the mailers varies from how Hoosiers can access constituent services, to tips on protecting seniors, to 2024 attacks on Biden administration policies. In December, U.S. Rep. Victoria Spartz sent mail to 5th District constituents with information about how Hoosiers could get help with federal agencies and sign up for a congressional newsletter. A mailer sent by U.S. Rep. Rudy Yakym to 2nd Congressional District constituents in January 2024 included images of former President Joe Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris, and accuses the prior administration of 'creating a humanitarian and national security crisis' through their border policies. Who represents Indiana in Congress?: Who you need to know and how to contact them U.S. Rep. Erin Houchin in May sent mail to 9th District constituents claiming to return 'nearly $3.5 million to constituents across Indiana's 9th District through casework assistance' and directed Hoosiers how to contact her office. Newspaper advertisements are frequent franking tools for Indiana's House members. Most approved for distribution in 2024 and 2025 provide readers with ways to contact their congressional offices or how to engage with their representatives. In May, U.S. Rep. Jefferson Shreve placed an ad in the Richmond Palladium-Item declaring he is 'fighting to build the wall,' 'secure our borders,' and 'protect our communities.' In mid-March, Spartz purchased newspaper ads ahead of nationally covered town halls she held in Westfield and Muncie. 'Please join for updates on Congresswoman Spartz's recent work,' the ad says, while listing examples including 'Make America Healthy Again' and 'Assist DOGE and President Trump in eliminating waste, fraud and abuse.' Mrvan in August 2024 published a newspaper ad that describes ways his office was 'standing up for the city of Gary and Northwest Indiana.' 'I'm proud to share with you my successful efforts to secure federal investments that will benefit all Gary residents, including the recent completion of the South Shore Rail Line Double Track project,' Mrvan said in the ad. Baird and Houchin regularly send out mass text messages to constituents in their district about political issues or ways to contact their office. Franked texts cost money, just like congressional mailers. Houchin has sent at least 15 texts from January through the end of July this eyar, which range from updates on legislation like Trump's 'One Big Beautiful Bill' or asking for feedback on Trump's performance ahead of his address to Congress in March. 'Hi, it's Rep. Houchin. I'm headed to the House Floor for Trump's joint session speech,' a Houchin text said on March 4, which quarterly disbursement reports show cost just over $3,500. 'I want your input: Is America headed in the RIGHT or WRONG direction under President Trump's leadership?' Baird's texts to 4th District constituents also seek insight on topics associated with his office, including a January message on Inauguration Day. 'Hi, it's Rep. Baird. I'm on my way to the Inauguration to watch President Donald Trump take his oath of office,' reads the Jan. 20 text, which disbursement reports show cost just over $4,000 to send. 'I want your input before seeing the President: What's the #1 issue Trump & Congress should tackle in 2025?' Contact IndyStar state government and politics reporter Brittany Carloni at
CNN
2 hours ago
- CNN
These college leaders are keeping the heat on in battle with Trump administration – despite settlements by prominent schools
College is the place where many students entering adulthood find their voice. But when it comes to addressing the White House's ongoing battle with elite higher education, many institutional leaders seem to have lost theirs. 'I don't know how many calls you have to make to get one (university) president to call you back,' President Michael S. Roth of Wesleyan University told CNN. 'The fact that I can, you know, name the people and count them on my hand, it's clearly an effort to keep one's head down and hope that your school will not suffer.' Roth is one of relatively few top university leaders who still openly criticizes the Trump administration for its monthslong campaign to pull funding from schools that don't toe its line on a host of issues, from diversity programs to transgender athletes and pro-Palestinian protests. While most students and professors were away from campus over the summer, the administration spent the season racking up wins against many of its top targets, with settlements from major universities that have promised a combination of fines, donations and policy commitments in line with Trump priorities. 'It's so much worse, I think, than I anticipated,' said Danielle Holley, president of Mount Holyoke College and another outspoken Trump critic who began warning about threats from the administration before Inauguration Day. Only Harvard University has taken on the White House directly in court, although the school has quietly pursued settlement possibilities on the side, a source familiar with the discussions told CNN. For those who have stayed on offense publicly, it's an increasingly lonely fight. 'There's no doubt about it that the severe tactics being used by our federal government are being highly effective,' acknowledged Holley, a civil rights attorney who became the leader of Mount Holyoke, the small central Massachusetts liberal arts college, in 2023. President Trump has made dismantling diversity, equity and inclusion programs – known as DEI – a top priority in his second term, focusing especially on transgender athletes in sports. 'Institutions of higher education have adopted and actively use dangerous, demeaning, and immoral race- and sex-based preferences under the guise of so-called 'diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI),'' stated an executive order President Trump signed on his second day in office. In a speech to a joint session of Congress, Trump called DEI 'tyranny.' The administration's first major college settlement this year was with the University of Pennsylvania, whose swimming program became a lightning rod after Lia Thomas, a transgender athlete who had previously competed on the men's team, set several women's records in 2022 on her way to dominating the Ivy League championship. 'We acknowledge that some student-athletes were disadvantaged by these rules,' UPenn President Larry Jameson said in a statement on July 1 announcing the agreement. 'We recognize this and will apologize to those who experienced a competitive disadvantage or experienced anxiety because of the policies in effect at the time.' That apology was worth $175 million to the university, as the White House released federal funding frozen three months earlier. While many universities have reconfigured, renamed, or scrubbed entirely any DEI references from their materials, Mount Holyoke – with just over 2,000 students – still has a dedicated DEI page on its website. 'Diversity, equity and inclusion efforts extend beyond specific departments and are embedded in all areas of the College,' the page states. Holley says continuing to speak out against the government's efforts to curtail DEI is not a matter of obstinance – but is critical to the mission of the 188-year-old college, one of the historic 'Seven Sisters,' and the first of that group to accept transgender students. 'At Mount Holyoke, we are a women's college, and because of that, we are built on diversity, equity and inclusion,' said Holley. Since the University of Pennsylvania's settlement, the deals between universities and the government have gotten more costly and the institutions more prominent. Columbia University signed a landmark $221 million settlement agreement with the administration last month to regain access to its federal grants. Acting President Claire Shipman acknowledged the pressure they faced at the loss of so much money but bristled at the idea that Columbia was surrendering to government intimidation. 'I actually think that the narrative that paints this as a kind of binary situation – courage versus capitulation – is just wrong. It's too simplistic,' Shipman told CNN Kate Bolduan on July 24. 'This was a really, really complex problem.' 'We could have faced the loss of any future relationship in the coming years with the federal government,' added Shipman, 'and that would have effectively meant an end to the research mission we conduct as we know it.' The Columbia deal includes an 'independent monitor' to resolve any ongoing disputes with the government over admissions and hiring, an idea that distresses Holley at Mount Holyoke. 'The idea that an American university would have a government monitor, not related to what they have been found to be in violation of, but related to their academic departments and the way that they hire people,' said Holley, 'I think everyone in the United States should be deeply concerned with the idea that our federal government is attempting to run private universities and attempting to tell those universities who to hire; what they should be teaching in their classrooms.' One week after the administration's deal with Columbia, Brown University, another elite Ivy League school, signed its own settlement with the government that included a ban on 'unlawful DEI goals' and banned transgender women from women's housing. The university also pledged $50 million to workforce development groups in Rhode Island, where Brown is located. 'The Trump Administration is successfully reversing the decades-long woke-capture of our nation's higher education institutions,' Education Secretary Linda McMahon said in a statement announcing the deal. 'Woke is officially DEAD at Brown,' President Trump crowed on social media. As the flurry of legal agreements in the past month has made clear, institutions of higher education are not going to hang together in a unified defense against the government's demands. While he continues to speak strongly against the administration, Roth says he understands why other college leaders would cut their own deals. 'The fear I think many schools have is that the federal government is willing to not obey the laws as anyone has understood them before, and so the lawless federal government is very frightening,' said Roth. 'If someone pays a ransom to get their kid back from a kidnapper, I don't criticize the parents for making a deal,' he added. 'It's the kidnappers that deserve our criticism.' The Trump administration has been fighting a two-pronged civil rights battle against colleges and universities – demanding an end to DEI programs that the government says are discriminatory while also accusing several institutions of antisemitism in their handling of pro-Palestinian protests on campus in 2024. In court filings involving Harvard, one of the last major holdouts, the Department of Education has pointed to the university's own report on antisemitism to claim the school ignored rampant discrimination against Jewish students and faculty members. 'Protestors followed and verbally harassed some Jewish students, vandalized Harvard's campus, and posted swastika stickers near Harvard Hillel's Rosovsky Hall,' a government brief says, citing Harvard's investigation. The university also released a report on discrimination against Palestinians and Muslims on campus – an issue not mentioned in the Department of Education's complaints. The Trump administration says Harvard has been talking to them behind the scenes about finding a way out of their legal standoff, which includes a second lawsuit in response to the administration's attempt to cancel Harvard's international student program, a move a court indefinitely put on hold in June. 'We're still in negotiations,' McMahon told Fox News last week. 'We are closer than we were. We are not there yet.' But Harvard President Alan Garber has told faculty that retaining its academic freedom without government-monitored 'intellectual diversity' – a major sticking point in early dealings with the administration – remains nonnegotiable, according to the student-run Harvard Crimson newspaper. 'Neither Harvard nor any other private university can allow itself to be taken over by the federal government,' Garber wrote in April when the school first filed suit against the government over more than $2 billion in frozen research funding. The fight continues to be costly for Harvard. A federal judge has not yet decided whether to order the government to turn the money spigot back on, causing budgetary pressure that prompted Garber to take a voluntary 25% pay cut. The administration's intense pressure on higher education programs and students has not been met with complete silence. An open letter signed by more than 600 college presidents in April called Trump's actions 'unprecedented government overreach.' 'We are open to constructive reform and do not oppose legitimate government oversight,' said the letter. 'However, we must oppose undue government intrusion in the lives of those who learn, live, and work on our campuses.' But Roth, one of the presidents who signed the letter, doesn't believe putting out one statement is enough. 'I was glad that they did, but I don't see many people sounding the alarm that this is an assault on the integrity of one of the most successful systems in America, the higher education system,' Roth said. Although not as prominent as Harvard or Columbia, Mount Holyoke is classified by the Carnegie Foundation as a research institution with a billion-dollar endowment, and Holley says its focus on women's issues has been a double whammy for its funding. 'If you are a researcher in this country, doing work on women's health, or doing work on women in STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Math), doing work on women in leadership, any research that has to do with women is being caught up in those government searches and is being canceled,' she said. 'When one of our research grants was cut, the wording from the federal government was that this kind of work related to gender is not beneficial and not scientific.' But the cuts have not only come from the Trump administration, according to Holley. She said some private funding sources are also stepping back and cutting grants because they are afraid to associate themselves with a school that might run afoul of the president. 'I would say that the estimate is about $2 million (in lost research funding), and that's both cancelations from the federal government directly and cancelations from private funders who fear what the federal government might do,' Holley said. At Wesleyan University – an institution in Middletown, Connecticut, with about 3,000 students – responding to the administration's policies and executive orders has meant reconfiguring some DEI programs. A summer camp program aimed at middle school girls in Middletown who were interested in STEM studies is now open to boys, as well. 'The fact is that girls weren't signing up for STEM as much as boys, so that's why we had that program,' said Roth. 'But it seemed to some boys – big boys, I guess – to be reverse discrimination.' With many other schools eliminating DEI programs or making them all but invisible, Holley believes that the quick moves to roll back those commitments, even without an immediate and direct legal threat, says as much about the schools as it does about the government. 'I think it is a representation of the fact that many organizations maybe did not believe in these principles as strongly as they said that they did, and the government has provided them with an out,' she said. After encountering limited pushback from its Ivy League targets, the Trump administration is moving on to public institutions, starting with freezing hundreds of millions of dollars in funding to the University of California, Los Angeles. UCLA is now actively negotiating with the Trump administration over a possible settlement. A government draft proposal would have the university pay $1 billion dollars, CNN has learned. 'There is a possibility that this administration, once they are done kind of dealing with Harvard and some of the larger institutions that they may begin to turn to the small liberal arts colleges,' said Holley. Despite the millions of dollars at stake in a fight with an administration flush with recent victories, Holley insists her criticism won't be muted. 'My mom was raised in the Jim Crow South, you know, both of my parents survived the Jim Crow era in this country, and I'm a student of the civil rights movement,' Holley said. 'In these moments, I would never think of not speaking up.'
