Hope for Compromise, Emotional Testimony Mark Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act Hearing
Senate Commerce Committee members and others signaled a continued willingness Tuesday to work toward a compromise version of the Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (S-1693) amid sometimes emotional testimony. Much of what lawmakers and witnesses said at the hearing revealed a continued divide over S-1693 and House companion HR-1865, which would amend Communications Decency Act Section 230. HR-1865/S-1693 has drawn substantial opposition from the tech and civil liberties communities, which perceive the bill as undermining protections for online platforms that host user-generated content and make them liable for information posted by third parties on their sites (see 1708010011 and 1708110022).
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
S-1693's main sponsors urged the tech sector to drop its opposition, with Sen. Rob Portman, R-Ohio, saying “the selling of human beings online is the dark side of the internet. It can’t be the cost of doing business.” Sites targeted by S-1693 “have to be proven to have knowingly facilitated, supported or assisted in online sex trafficking to be liable in the first place,” Portman said. “Because the standard is so high, our bill protects good tech actors and targets rogue online actors like Backpage.” Congress needs to "pass this measure," said Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn. "If we fail to do so -- if we fail to close this gap and fill this legal black hole -- we become complicit." He countered tech opponents' claims about the bill, saying there “will be no deluge of frivolous lawsuits,” with the bill requiring human trafficking victims to establish legal standing.
Sen. Ron Wyden, D-Ore., backed tech arguments against the legislation. S-1693 “is the wrong answer to an important question” about combating online sex trafficking, he said. The legislation likely would drive much of the online sex trafficking activity “underground,” making it more difficult to address, Wyden said. Internet Association General Counsel Abigail Slater called S-1693 “a well-intentioned response to a terrible situation,” with Santa Clara University School of Law professor Eric Goldman contending the measure is “not the right vehicle,” all as expected (see 1709180044).
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra, a Democrat, backed the measure as needed to close loopholes in Section 230 that prevented him from prosecuting Backpage, an online want ad site, on charges beyond conspiracy and money laundering. “I’ve got to prove that it’s sex trafficking and that the defendants intentionally violated” Section 230, he said. “If we don’t have the tools, the only winners are those who go to the internet.” National Center for Missing and Exploited Children General Counsel Yiota Souras said Section 230's existing provisions require an update.
All sides pointed to emotional testimony from Yvonne Ambrose, mother of 16-year-old slain sex-trafficking victim Desiree Robinson, as proof Congress needs to do more. “If there were stricter rules in place for posting on these websites, then my child would still be with me,” Ambrose said. Commerce ranking member Bill Nelson, D-Fla., said Ambrose's testimony was “fairly dramatic” and strongly supported passage. Chairman John Thune, R-S.D., said he was hopeful “there is a path forward” on the bill and urged stakeholders and lawmakers to continue working toward compromise on provisions that could produce “unintended consequences.”
Senate Communications Subcommittee ranking member Brian Schatz, D-Hawaii, and some other committee Democrats appeared to be considering how to move forward. Schatz said he's searching for a way to better balance the statute given his continued concerns that the proposed standard for proving that websites knowingly facilitated, supported or assisted in online sex trafficking was too broad. Schatz suggested the addition of language saying the law "is intended to apply to those actors that enable sex trafficking and not to those who promptly act in good faith to address a violation." Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto, D-Nev., hoped she and other members can “get to a point where we can all agree” on a compromise version of S-1693.