Latest news with #AssemblyPublicSafety
Epoch Times
03-05-2025
- Politics
- Epoch Times
Bill Author Removed From California Child Sex Trafficking Bill
California Democratic Assemblywoman Maggy Krell from Sacramento was removed as author of her own bill on May 1 after she joined Republicans in a renewed attempt to strengthen penalties for buying 16- and 17-year-olds for sex. The state Assembly voted 55–21 to reject a provision of Krell's name as bill author was replaced by two of her Democratic colleagues, Assembly Public Safety Chair Nick Schultz from Burbank and Assemblymember Stephanie Nguyen from Elk Grove. In 'Minors of any age in the state of California that are contacted for a sexual purpose, that is punishable by a felony already,' said Schultz, a former deputy attorney general with the California Department of Justice (DOJ). In response, Krell, who is also a former deputy attorney general for the California DOJ, said there is still a loophole in California law that fails to clarify that purchasing sex with a minor is rape. Related Stories 4/30/2025 5/1/2025 'The problem with [the law], which my colleague from Burbank referenced, is it includes a whole host of statutes for contacting a minor, but there's one that's missing: prostitution,' she said. She said she didn't care whether her name was on the bill, but she said she was concerned that the bill no longer treats 16- and 17-year-olds as victims. 'We need to say loud and clear that if you're under 18, a child, a minor ... that the person who's buying that person should be charged with a felony. It's plain and simple,' she said. The legislation advanced on April 29 after the provision was removed in a 7–0 vote in the public safety committee. Democratic Assemblymembers Mia Bonta and LaShae Sharp-Collins abstained from the committee vote. They did not reply to a request for comment from The Epoch Times. At the time, Schultz 'As we've heard today and outside of this chamber, there are Californians who are concerned about unintended consequences on young adults and LGBTQIA+ Californians, should it be a felony for 16- and 17-year-olds,' Schultz said before the vote. The Epoch Times reached out to Schultz and Krell for comment. California state Sen. Scott Wiener, who pushed for the same provision to be removed in a similar bill last year, Newsom Criticizes Removal of Provision In response to the committee vote, California Gov. Gavin Newsom spoke out against members of his own party for removing the provision from the bill. 'The law should treat all sex predators who solicit minors the same—as a felony, regardless of the intended victim's age. Full stop,' the governor's office said in an emailed statement to The Epoch Times on April 30. The governor's office says Newsom has been consistent on this issue, pointing to a bill he signed in 2023, Senate Bill 14, that made sex trafficking of minors a In 2024, the governor signed into law Senate Bill 1414, also authored by Grove, which Back then, amendments also excluded 16- and 17-year-olds, which Grove said was disappointing. This year, she co-authored AB 379 with Krell to fix this loophole, along with implementing penalties for loitering to purchase sex and funding survivor support. Democratic committee leaders again removed the provisions that would have made purchasing older minors a felony. 'They did that to my bill last year,' Grove told The Epoch Times on May 1. 'They excluded 16- and 17-year-olds from the felony provisions, treating them like adults, which is completely absurd.' Republican Assemblyman Juan Alanis, vice chair of the public safety committee, who co-authored the sex trafficking bills both this year and last year, said he had 'never been more angry and disturbed by actions taken on the Assembly Floor' on May 1. 'Purchasing or trafficking any minor of any age for sex should be a felony. Period,' he said in an emailed statement. The public safety committee plans to schedule an informational hearing in the fall to discuss the felony provision, according to Schultz.
San Francisco Chronicle
02-05-2025
- Politics
- San Francisco Chronicle
Are California Democrats actively trying to make themselves irrelevant?
Are California Democrats trying to make themselves irrelevant? They must be — because it's getting increasingly difficult to come up with rational explanations for the self-sabotaging actions they're taking in the state Legislature. After a month that saw prominent state Democratic leaders take absurd stances on bills to improve early childhood literacy and housing availability, state Assembly members on Thursday argued for more than an hour about whether it should be a felony to purchase 16- and 17-year-olds for sex. Their ultimate conclusion: We'll think about it — but probably not. Assembly Democrats overwhelmingly voted to strip AB379 by Assembly Member Maggy Krell, D-Sacramento, of its key provision — to toughen penalties for offenders convicted of purchasing 16- and 17-year-olds for sex to match the punishments for those convicted of purchasing kids 15 and younger. Instead, they inserted an amendment stating that 'It is the intent of the Legislature to adopt the strongest laws to protect 16- and 17-year-old victims and strengthen protections in support of victims of human trafficking.' Krell's name, along with those of nearly two dozen co-authors, were also wiped from the bill and replaced with two new authors: Assembly Public Safety Chair Nick Schultz, D-Burbank, and Assembly Member Stephanie Nguyen, D-Elk Grove. The irony, of course, is that keeping Krell's bill intact would have been the strongest protection for 16- and 17-year-old victims. Krell knows what she's talking about: As a former prosecutor in the California Department of Justice, she helped bring down Backpage, one of the largest sex trafficking websites in the world. Democrats' refusal to back her effort forced Gov. Gavin Newsom to take a break from podcasting and issue a stern statement: 'The law should treat all sex predators who solicit minors the same — as a felony, regardless of the intended victim's age.' Why are the consequences for those who try to purchase sex from 16- or 17-year-olds different from other minors in the first place? Last year, state Sen. Shannon Grove, R-Bakersfield, introduced a bill to require child sex buyers to face felony charges. At the time, offenders faced only misdemeanor charges — a maximum of one year in jail and a potential $10,000 fine. Grove was fresh off a massive political victory over Democrats: In 2023, the Assembly Public Safety Committee killed her bill to classify human trafficking of minors as a 'serious' felony, arguing that offenders already faced potentially lengthy sentences. This tone-deaf reasoning sparked immediate backlash and a swift intervention from Newsom and Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas, D-Hollister, and Grove's bill was revived and signed into law. But Democrats in the Senate Public Safety Committee balked at Grove's new bill, suggesting it could lead to teenagers being punished for having sex with each other or be weaponized against LGBT people. Over Grove's objections, they amended the bill to loosen protections for 16- and 17-year-olds. Under the revised bill, which Newsom signed into law, people convicted of purchasing kids 15 and younger for sex could face either misdemeanor or felony charges on the first offense and felony charges on the second offense. But those protections would only apply to 16- and 17-year-olds if they could prove they were victims of human trafficking. This carveout was a political compromise, but it made little logical or moral sense. As Krell emphasized in passionate comments Thursday, 'There is no such thing as a child prostitute.' She noted that under federal law, 'You're automatically a victim of human trafficking if you're under 18 and bought for sex. … Sex without consent, that's rape. The exchange of money doesn't change that.' But, once again, Democrats are contorting themselves into rhetorical pretzels to defend the indefensible. 'This bill with the amendments sends a clear message to every 16- and 17-year-old who has been caught in the nightmare of human trafficking — you are not invisible, you are not alone, and we will fight for you,' proclaimed Assembly Member Mark González, D-Los Angeles. The amendments sent a message, all right — that purchasing a 16- or 17-year-old for sex isn't as bad as purchasing other underage victims. Meanwhile, Assembly Member Marc Berman, D-Menlo Park, chastised Republican lawmakers for their 'selective outrage,' noting that President Donald Trump sought to appoint former Rep. Matt Gaetz — who was found likely to have engaged in sexual activity with a 17-year-old girl — as his attorney general. Yet Berman's argument undermined his own stance: By refusing to support Krell's bill in its original form, he was effectively arguing that people who purchase 17-year-old prostitution victims shouldn't face as severe of penalties. His view would give the Matt Gaetz's of the world a pass. Schultz, meanwhile, slammed the Assembly for 'playing politics' with the bill. After the Assembly Public Safety Committee on Tuesday voted to pass Krell's bill after once again carving out older teenagers, Republicans — sensing blood in the water — said they would force a floor vote on the issue Thursday, and Krell defied Assembly leadership by announcing she planned to vote with Republicans. This infuriated Rivas and Schultz, who said Krell had agreed to accept the committee's revisions. But what the Democratic caucus sees as political insubordination, average Californians are likely to see as a righteous battle. 'Somehow, as the president tanks our economy and deports innocent children, the American people still don't trust Democrats,' said Assembly Member Jasmeet Bains, D-Bakersfield. 'Any sane person knows that purchasing a 16- or 17-year-old for sex should be a felony, not a misdemeanor. This should not be a debate.' But even Newsom's intervention couldn't save Krell's bill Thursday — 56 Assembly Democrats voted to move the bill forward with Schultz' and Nguyen's amendments. Republicans were joined by just three Democrats in voting against the amendments: Krell, Bains and Assembly Member Joaquin Arambula, D-Fresno. Ignoring Newsom, a lame-duck governor with just one year left in his term, is one thing. But clinging to nonsensical arguments in defense of bad policy is another. Rather than admit they're wrong, far too many Democrats seem perfectly happy to sanctimoniously dig the party's political grave. Reach Emily Hoeven: X: @emily_hoeven
