News

‘Should Police Arrest Sex Workers for Standing Around?’ No, Of Course Not.

capitolhilltim

“Should police detain sex workers just for being there?”The Los Angeles Times askedYesterday, he called the subject a “thorny issue.” This shouldn’t seem like a complicated question (only misogynists or authoritarians could believe it to be, according to @seran72 on Twitter). suggests). The rights of sexual workers to be present in public places is not a second-class right. Furthermore, police can use vague and undefined “loitering against prostitution” laws, such as this one, to harass people. Because they permit arrest for just being outside of what authorities believe you should be,

These laws are being criticized by transgender people and those of color as they pose a danger to their rights. Many refer to these laws as “walking while tran” laws. The laws like this don’t permit prostitution or solicitation of prostitution. However, they only allow the public to be exposed in a way authorities determine indicates an intent to sell sexual sex. It’s not difficult to imagine how these subjective criteria could be misused or used in discriminatory manners.

New York State repealed the “loitering in prostitution” statute last February. California might follow suit. California passed last September a bill that would repeal the law banning “loitering with the intent of prostitution.” It is now up to the Democratic governor. Gavin Newsom will approve or reject the bill.

To justify repealing the law, opponents rely on scare tactics and paternalism. Trotting out the evidence-free assertion that most people selling sex are actually victims being forced into it, they claim that arresting sex workers is the only way to save them—never mind the trauma that can come from arrest, the potential for police abuse, the danger inherent in jails (especially during a pandemic), or the fact that saddling someone with court fees and a criminal record is hardly the basis for expanded opportunities.

The TimesCalifornia’s efforts to repeal the prostitution loitering laws repeats prohibitionist tropes. After opening with the laziness, lazy and dramatic prose that is typical of media about sex workers, it continues. (Star and Dream stood in the Mission District on dark streets selling sex to men, and a cold blue light from their convenience store signs spilled onto them. A scene that was repeated on numerous ‘tracks across the state’ every day, saw men driving slowly behind the women in their cars, who were just beyond their teenage years, but looking young enough for a trip to high school.)

In the article, sex workers note that loitering laws are in effect doesn’tThey are harassed by police instead of being able to help. One says, “I have been given tickets just for standing here.” Another says that police “are always trying to find a reason not to bother me.”

The problem is that TimesGives equal time to those who are against prostitution and attempts to decriminalize them, such as a former prosecutor with an upcoming book on her (unconstitutional and unsuccessful) prosecution of Backpage’s founders. Inexplicably, the article portrays the battle over loitering law as pitting “sex worker against other sex worker and trafficking survivors”, despite the fact no sex workers for repeal have actually been quoted. There’s plenty of research that suggests that decriminalization could reduce sex trafficking, and make everyone safer.

The bottom line, as San Francisco sex worker Lisseth Sánchez tells the TimesIt is not required to detain people for their own safety.

FREE MINDS 

New York legislator pushes for unconstitutional infringing on social media speech. Democrats and Republicans are mad at Section 230—the federal communications law that, among other things, shields social media companies from some legal liability for user-generated posts—”because they both want to control the internet in a manner that helps ‘their team,'” suggests Mike Masnick at Techdirt. We’ve also said that! Both approaches are unconstitutional attempts to violate 1st Amendment rights. It’s usually the compelled hosting or deletion of speech for Republicans. Both are against the Constitution.

Republicans in Texas and Florida have passed unconstitutional social-media laws that are blatantly illegal. Democrats now want to play in California, New York.

New York Senator Brad Hoylman, notes that he “has proudly proposed a hellishly inconstitutional bill on social media” Techdirt:

Hoylman declares in a press release that this bill will “hold tech companies responsible for proliferating hate speech and vaccine misinformation.” Do you see the problems with this bill? You knew it. The 1st Amendment, regardless of whether we agree with it or not protects hate speech and vaccine misinformation. To punish someone for such speech is against the Constitution. It’s absurd to penalize websites hosting that content but not having any involvement in its creation.

You can find more information about the bill right here.

FREIGHT MARKETS

The peak housing bubble of 2006 saw home prices rise 41% today, according to a report.Michael Hendrix (director of state and policy at the Manhattan Institute), notes that Persuasion. During the same time, median incomes increased by just 8.8 percent. So what can we do?

Hendrix urges you to get rid of all restrictive zoning legislation

Advocates for homeownership argue that prices of home are artificially high due to a dangerously low supply. This is due to costly red tape and bureaucracy. Less supply and rising demand mean higher prices—it’s Economics 101. America has nearly 4 million homes that aren’t in demand. With top-down regulations governing what land owners can do with their property, such as mandates to build single-family homes or large lots that require lots of parking, zoning rules create the infrastructure for cities and towns.

Emily Badger of The New York Times observes, “It’s illegal to construct anything else than a detached single family home on 75% residential land.” …

Housing prices used to be at their highest point in march in lockstep with the cost of construction—pay more and you get a better house. In the 1970s, when zoning was first introduced nationwide, these two prices started to diverge. As a result, home prices have risen while building costs have remained steady. This gap acts as a “zoning taxes” and imposes disproportionate burdens on those who are least fortunate. It also raises entry costs to the cities that offer the greatest opportunities and jobs. Housing crisis today is the American Dream made a disaster.

QUICK HITS

• COVID-19 cases in the U.S. have reached a new peak that’s more than double the previous peak:

• Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D–N.Y.) is threatening to change Senate rules if Republicans block a vote on Democrats’ voting bill. In a Dear Colleague note, he said yesterday that rules meant once to cut down obstruction had been weaponized to ensure obstruction. Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) called itIt was a “rash and partisan power grab.”

• “More Border Patrol Agents died in the line of duty during 2021 than in any other time since the agency’s inception,” reported Breitbart. The headline about “historical levels of line-of duty deaths” and the fearmongering tweet did not mention that 13 agents were killed by COVID-19.

• The democracy-is-ending industrial complex churns on…

• A victory for Libertarian Party members in Maine, where a federal judge ruled that “Libertarians can nominate candidates under the party banner for the 2022 election, regardless whether their numbers reach the minimum threshold under state law.”

• A privacy lawsuit against Amazon can continue. Amazon.com Inc was unable to convince an Illinois federal court to dismiss a lawsuit alleging that the company illegally collected ‘facial geometry’ scans of employees at fulfilment warehouses in COVID-19 wellness check. The class action was filed by a former employee against Amazon.com Inc. Mary Rowland, U.S. District Judge in Chicago. She claimed the ecommerce company obtained his facial information and consented to it.

• Department of prohibition kills:

• COVID is ravaging city jails again. In New York City, the infection rate “has hit a staggering new high – with almost 37% of prisoners recently tested for the virus coming back positive,” the New York Daily News reports. “The new numbers — measuring a seven-day test positivity through Sunday — come two weeks after the outgoing city jails commissioner warned of a ‘crisis level’ of COVID cases bearing down on the population at the troubled Rikers Island complex.”

• Are strip club dancers employees or independent contractors? This is a question that is becoming more common in lawsuits. According to the report, “National court records from federal courts show that over two dozen lawsuits against Jaguars corporate owners have been filed. RCI Hospitality Holdings is a Houston-based for-profit corporation that owns dozens of topless and strip clubs that are marketed under different brand names. Texas Observer.

• The fight over Biden’s Federal Trade Commission and Federal Communications Commission nominations continues.