DOJ comments oppose amendments to human trafficking model law and reporting provisions

f 20, Section 224 This section misunderstands the purpose and effect of the model Jaw and should be deleted. The Department’s model law was never designed to supplant pre-existing state laws which target pimping, pandering, or prostitution, but rather to supplement those laws. At the time that the Department’s model law was issued, most states had comprehensive laws addressing prostitution, pimping, and pandering. However, most states did not have laws focused on human trafficking. The Depattment’s law was designed to raise awareness of the issue of trafficking and to encourage states to closely examine cases to ensure that cases involving fraud, force, and coercion are not labeled as prostitution offenses. The Department believes the law has been successful in accomplishing this goal. 21. Section 231 The Department opposes any statutory changes to the annual report, The change in subsection (1) is unnecessary as this language is currently included in the annual report. The information requested in the new subsection (I) would be excessively burdensome to gather. 22, Section 232 DO3 opposes this addition as unnecessary. Human trafficking laws that do not require the proof of force, fraud, or coercion, namely laws that concern minor victims of severe forms of buman trafficking, are already discussed at the annual conferences. To the extent that this provision would require the Department to discuss human trafficking laws pertaining to adult victims that do not require the showing of force, fraud, or coercion, such laws would not fall under the definition of human trafficking and the annual conference would be an inappropriate venue for the discussion of such laws. However, DOJ trafficking prosecutors utilize a wide range of statutes in addition to Chapter 77 offenses to address all criminal conduct associated with human trafficking. This includes the Mann Act, money laundering, visa fraud, immigration offenses, criminal labor violations, and extortion, in addition to other criminal statutes, Accordingly, DOJ traiming at annual conferences, the National Advocacy Center, the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and field training with the Department of Justice funded Human Trafficking Task Forces and provided through the Innocence Lost National Initiative include discussion on the importance of using all available criminal statutes as essential tools in charging decisions. Thus, this section is unnecessary. 23. Section 233 DOJ opposes the change to section 206 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005, which would remove the discretion of agencies in informing the Senior Policy Operating Group (SPOG) of grants. Such a change could be read as giving the SPOG oversight authority over grants. It also fails to take into consideration situations where gtant-making agencies may be unable to notify the SPOG of the grant. i 10 HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_012381