ESPLERP files a historic brief in the 9th Circuit

[Lena Duvall]

In 2015, ESPLERP (the Erotic Service Providers Legal, Education and Research Project) filed a suit against California Attorney General Kamala Harris and four statewide district attorneys to determine the constitutionality of anti-prostitution laws. Last year, a federal judge dismissed the suit and determined that "the intimate association between a prostitute and client, while it may be consensual and cordial, does not merit protection through the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment."

Yesterday, ESPLERP presented a brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit asserting that "the State... misapprehends the fundamental liberty interest at issue..." regarding anti-prostitution laws in California. If the 9th Circuit rules differently than the lower court, there could be huge implications regarding the possibility of decriminalizing sex work in the eight other states besides California under it's jurisdiction.

[chicagoboy]

So far, they're batting 0 for 2. (Proposition K in 2008 was voted down 51-49.) Let us know when they get a hit, not just another at-bat.

[Contralto]

Originally Posted by chicagoboy

So far, they're batting 0 for 2. (Proposition K in 2008 was voted down 51-49.) Let us know when they get a hit, not just another at-bat.

I think they see it as a 'chipping away at the ice' rather than a swing and a miss. They'll keep going back, chipping away, until finally the door swings somewhere. I really do believe I'll live to see prostitution legalized in the U.S. Somehow, some way.

[n0laARIES87]

With unemployment, education reform, foreign relations, immigration, alternative energy and every other relevant issue needing attention, the fact that space is still being made at the table for this "discussion" in 2017 is ridiculous. Politicians continue 2 use legislation as a makeshift hiding skirt to push their questionable interpretation of "moral fiber"(all the while knowing some of their colleagues make up a significant percentage of the hobby community). The federal judge in Lena's story said it themselves: its "consensual and cordial". We've seen in the past how shifting the venue of a cultural practicefrom the forefront 2 the shadows is flawed as a "preventative measure".I suppose they'll get to the actual malicious offenders who target innocent minors when their schedules clear up. I enjoy the hobby,but were the current rules & ordinances on the books overturned, I still would never make an effort to push, recruit, or persuade someone to join the hobby if they felt uncomfortable. Provided they don't harm others, people's beliefs should be respected across the board. I guess providers and hobbyists just aren't worth the reciprocation. smh