[House Hearing, 119 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
USING MODERN TOOLS TO COUNTER
HUMAN TRAFFICKING
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBERSECURITY,
INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY,
AND GOVERNMENT INNOVATION
of the
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND
GOVERNMENT REFORM
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED NINETEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
DECEMBER 10, 2025
__________
Serial No. 119-52
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available on: govinfo.gov, oversight.house.gov or docs.house.gov
______
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
62-182 PDF WASHINGTON : 2026
COMMITTEE ON OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM
JAMES COMER, Kentucky, Chairman
Jim Jordan, Ohio Robert Garcia, California, Ranking
Mike Turner, Ohio Minority Member
Paul Gosar, Arizona Eleanor Holmes Norton, District of
Virginia Foxx, North Carolina Columbia
Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin Stephen F. Lynch, Massachusetts
Michael Cloud, Texas Raja Krishnamoorthi, Illinois
Gary Palmer, Alabama Ro Khanna, California
Clay Higgins, Louisiana Kweisi Mfume, Maryland
Pete Sessions, Texas Shontel Brown, Ohio
Andy Biggs, Arizona Melanie Stansbury, New Mexico
Nancy Mace, South Carolina Maxwell Frost, Florida
Pat Fallon, Texas Summer Lee, Pennsylvania
Byron Donalds, Florida Greg Casar, Texas
Scott Perry, Pennsylvania Jasmine Crockett, Texas
William Timmons, South Carolina Emily Randall, Washington
Tim Burchett, Tennessee Suhas Subramanyam, Virginia
Marjorie Taylor Greene, Georgia Yassamin Ansari, Arizona
Lauren Boebert, Colorado Wesley Bell, Missouri
Anna Paulina Luna, Florida Lateefah Simon, California
Nick Langworthy, New York Dave Min, California
Eric Burlison, Missouri Ayanna Pressley, Massachusetts
Eli Crane, Arizona Rashida Tlaib, Michigan
Brian Jack, Georgia James R. Walkinshaw, Virginia
John McGuire, Virginia
Brandon Gill, Texas
------
Mark Marin, Staff Director
James Rust, Deputy Staff Director
Ryan Giachetti, Chief Counsel
Josh Mathis, Senior Advisor
Raj Bharwani, Senior Professional Staff Member
Duncan Wright, Deputy Director of Policy
Mallory Cogar, Director of Operations and Chief Clerk
Contact Number: 202-225-5074
Robert Edmonson, Minority Staff Director
Contact Number: 202-225-5051
------
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information Technology, and Government
Innovation
Nancy Mace, South Carolina, Chairwoman
Lauren Boebert, Colorado Shontel Brown, Ohio, Ranking
Anna Paulina Luna, Florida Member
Eric Burlison, Missouri Ro Khanna, California
Eli Crane, Arizona Suhas Subramanyam, Virginia
John McGuire, Virginia Yassamin Ansari, Arizona
C O N T E N T S
----------
OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
Hon. Nancy Mace, U.S. Representative, Chairman................... 1
Hon. Shontel Brown, U.S. Representative, Ranking Member.......... 3
WITNESSES
Ms. Megan Lundstrom, Chief Executive Officer, Polaris
Oral Statement................................................... 5
Ms. Melissa Snow, Executive Director, National Center for Missing
& Exploited Children
Oral Statement................................................... 7
Ms. Cara Jones, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer, Marinus
Analytics
Oral Statement................................................... 8
Mr. Roy L. Austin Jr., Director, Artificial Intelligence
Initiative, Howard University
Oral Statement................................................... 10
Written opening statements and bios are available on the U.S.
House of Representatives Document Repository at:
docs.house.gov.
INDEX OF DOCUMENTS
* Article, WYFF, ``2 Greenville Co. Men Charged in Human
Trafficking Investigation Involving Minor, SLED says'';
submitted by Rep. Mace.
* Article, Live 5 News WCSC, ``4 Indicted in Charleston-Area
Sex Trafficking Case; Search on for More Victims''; submitted
by Rep. Mace.
* Article, The Berkley Observer, ``Berkeley County Ranks No. 4
In SC For Human Trafficking Cases Report''; submitted by Rep.
Mace.
* Article, Your Island News, ``DSS, Runaway Beaufort Preteen
Victim of Human Trafficking''; submitted by Rep. Mace.
* Article, Live 5 News WCSC, ``Hanahan Husband, Wife Charged
With Trafficking, Sexually Exploiting Girl''; submitted by Rep.
Mace.
* Article, WYFF, ``Juveniles Rescued From Human Trafficking,
Immigration Arrests Made at SC Restaurant''; submitted by Rep.
Mace.
* Article, WBTV, ``Man Accused of Trafficking Teen in Rock
Hill''; submitted by Rep. Mace.
* Article, The State, ``Rep. Nancy Mace: Human Trafficking is
Rising in South Carolina, Here's How We Fight it''; submitted
by Rep. Mace.
* Article, WRDW, ``S.C. Human Trafficking Shows 400% Increase
in 2022, Report Says''; submitted by Rep. Mace.
* Article, WYFF, ``South Carolina Women Accused of Trafficking
Minors for Cleaning Service''; submitted by Rep. Mace.
* Letter, December 8, 2025, from John Vithoulkas, to
Subcommittee; submitted by Rep. Mace.
* Press Release, U.S. Attorney's Office, District of South
Carolina, ``Beaufort Co. Men Charged with Child Sex
Trafficking''; submitted by Rep. Mace.
* Article, The Guardian, ``Trump Administration Retreats on
Combatting Human Trafficking''; submitted by Rep. Subramanyam.
The documents listed above are available at: docs.house.gov.
ADDITIONAL DOCUMENTS
* Questions for the Record: Mr. Roy L. Austin Jr.; submitted by
Rep. Yassamin Ansari.
* Questions for the Record: Ms. Cara Jones; submitted by Rep.
Eli Crane.
* Questions for the Record: Ms. Melissa Snow; submitted by Rep.
Eli Crane.
These documents were submitted after the hearing, and may be
available upon request.
USING MODERN TOOLS TO COUNTER
HUMAN TRAFFICKING
----------
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 10, 2025
U.S. House of Representatives
Committee on Oversight and Government Reform
Subcommittee on Subcommittee on Cybersecurity,
Information Technology, and Government Innovation
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 3:37 p.m., in
room 2247, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Nancy Mace
[Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Present: Representatives Mace, Burlison, Brown, and
Subramanyam.
Ms. Mace. The Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Information
Technology, and Government Innovation will now come to order.
And we welcome everyone.
Without objection, the Chair may declare a recess at any
time.
And I will now recognize myself for the purpose of making
an opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRWOMAN NANCY MACE
REPRESENTATIVE FROM SOUTH CAROLINA
Good afternoon. Thank you all for being here today for this
important hearing on using technology to counter human
trafficking. Human trafficking is not an abstract crime. It is
happening right now, everywhere: on our phones, in our
teenagers' pockets, on websites, you scroll past on social
media without even thinking, and in the hotel rooms just off
the interstates which run through all of our districts all
across the country.
The average age a victim is first trafficked in the United
States could be as low as 12 to 14 years old. Let that sink in.
And you look at the Epstein victims, for example, they were 14,
many of them.
While we are sitting here, children are being bought and
sold online like commodities. These websites and communication
platforms allow traffickers to operate in unimaginable ways.
But as this--as we are here today, technology also provides
us with a huge opportunity to fight this terrible crime with
21st century tools. Artificial intelligence, data analytics,
and digital forensics are no longer science fiction. They are
recovering victims in hours instead of months, identifying
networks once hidden in plain sight and building courtroom-
ready cases against predators who thought the internet made
them untouchable.
But here is the hard truth. We are still fighting this
fight with one hand tied behind our backs. Law enforcement is
drowning in more than 20 million cyber tip line reports a year,
while task forces are understaffed and underfunded and
sometimes stuck using tools that were considered cutting edge
20 years ago.
Tech companies are generating mountains of raw data,
requiring increased resources to sort through it all. And well-
meaning initiatives with the best intentions have, in some
cases, driven trafficking deeper into the dark corners of the
internet, making it harder for our investigators to follow.
According to South Carolina's corrupt Attorney General,
Alan Wilson, in the state of South Carolina, a position he has
held for 16 years, human trafficking is up over 400 percent,
and he is proud of it. It is obscene. It is disgusting. And,
Alan, if you are listening or watching this right now, I have
got it coming for you.
We can do better. We must do better. And I am hoping to
learn from our witnesses today what is working, what is not,
and most importantly, what Congress needs to do next. Because
many in our states, like Attorney General Alan Wilson, are not
doing anything. In fact, I just learned recently, Alan Wilson
prosecuted zero pedophile cases last year in the State of South
Carolina. Zero.
Are our current laws helping or hurting? Do we have the
funding, the data-sharing authorities, and the public-private
partnerships we need to turn good technology into rescued
lives? And how do we make sure innovation outpaces the
criminals who adapt overnight?
Congress has both the responsibility and the ability to
remove bureaucratic roadblocks, fund proven solutions, and
write smarter laws which actually protect the vulnerable,
instead of just making us feel like we did something. There is
no issue more urgent, and there is no excuse for inaction.
I look forward for the testimony today of our witnesses and
to working with my colleagues on both sides of the aisle to
turn today's conversation into tomorrow's results. And I want
to thank you.
I do want to request unanimous consent to enter some
articles into the record. The first is in Beaufort County in my
district. Men were charged with--Beaufort County Men Charged
With Child Sex Trafficking, Coercion, Child Sexual Abuse
Material Distribution in November, just a month ago, 2025.
The next article is on Live 5 News 4. Indicted. In my
district in Charleston area, sex trafficking case and a search
for more victims.
The next article also in my district, Hanahan husband and
wife charged with trafficking and sexually exploiting a girl.
In Greenville County, South Carolina, two Greenville County
men charged in human trafficking investigation involving minor,
SLED says, on WYFF.
In Rock Hill, South Carolina, on WBTV, man accused of
trafficking teen in Rock Hill.
On WYFF, from Horry County in Myrtle Beach, two women
charged with human trafficking of minors, SLED says.
Homeland Security, juveniles rescued from human
trafficking, immigration arrests made at a South Carolina
restaurant in West Union, South Carolina, small town South
Carolina.
South Carolina human trafficking shows 400 percent increase
in 2022, according to reports in Columbia, South Carolina.
And the Berkeley County Observer, in my home county where I
grew up, Berkeley County ranks number four--number four--in
South Carolina for human trafficking cases.
And in the Your Island News, runaway Beaufort preteen
victim of human trafficking, according to this report.
And, last, there was an op-ed that I wrote in July 2024 in
the state newspaper. Human trafficking is rising in South
Carolina, and here is how we fight it.
So, without objection, so ordered.
I will now recognize Member Brown for her opening
statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SHONTEL BROWN
REPRESENTATIVE FROM OHIO
Ms. Brown. Thank you, Chairwoman Mace, for calling this
Subcommittee hearing.
I appreciate the opportunity to discuss how technology can
help law enforcement better detect, investigate, and prosecute
cases of human trafficking. Human trafficking can look like
kidnapping or physical force, but most human traffickers rely
on means, such as fraud, manipulation, or threats, to force
those they are trafficking into performing sex work or labor.
As of January 2025, it is estimated that over 27 million
people around the world were subject to human trafficking.
While people of all ages and genders are trafficked, predators
usually target vulnerable individuals and communities. This
includes children in foster care, immigrants, and individuals
facing addiction, trauma, or abuse. So, strengthening our
social safety net and looking at underlying causes is critical
to any comprehensive effort to address human trafficking.
Technology can also play an important role with so much of
this illicit activity taking place on the internet. For
example, artificial intelligence and other technology solutions
can enhance our ability to track and trace human trafficking by
targeting the very websites and online resources that
traffickers use to profit from the misery of others. But even
with these solutions, it is important that we keep survivors
and their experience and stories at the center of our efforts
to combat trafficking.
Technology alone will not end human trafficking, and
survivors offer knowledge and lived experience that no
algorithm can provide. Survivors know what predators say, how
they act, what kinds of interventions create a safe environment
without amplifying harm. I look forward to hearing today about
ways that responsible use of technology can strengthen
solutions that truly support survivors.
So, yes, fighting human trafficking requires technology and
resources, but it also requires law enforcement officers
skilled at investigating, intercepting, and prosecuting
traffickers. Yet, what has this Administration done? Well, it
has spent this year diverting resources away from efforts to
combat human trafficking both in the United States and abroad.
For example, Homeland Security agents who previously worked
on human trafficking have been redeployed to supporting the
President's cruel and reckless immigration agenda. That means
experts on transnational crime are no longer spending their
time cracking down on human trafficking rings. They are,
instead, patrolling the streets with ICE to check the papers
and harass nonviolent immigrants.
The backwardness does not end there. The Administration
also abandoned the United States' role as a global leader in
the fight against trafficking. In July, President Trump gutted
the State's Department office to monitor and combat trafficking
in persons which has spent the past 25 years--25 years--working
to combat human sex and labor trafficking around the world. So,
not only is the Trump Administration making it harder to catch
traffickers, but they are also making it easier for traffickers
to find and exploit victims.
Flooding the streets with masked armed men who refuse to
identify themselves is incredibly dangerous and cowardly. The
FBI has even issued a warning to State and Federal law
enforcement agencies that criminals impersonating ICE agents
have carried out robberies, kidnappings, and sexual assaults.
Under the Trump immigration crackdown, immigrants of all
sorts, including people in this country legally, have become
afraid of law enforcement. People now have to confront the
question of whether they will be harassed or even deported or
detained simply for reporting crimes like human trafficking to
law enforcement. So, ICE's masked squads pulling people off the
street at random have created the kind of fear that allows
traffickers to thrive. Witnesses and survivors are less likely
to come forward.
While I welcome this conversation on how technology can
help to counter human trafficking, I am severely, severely
concerned the Administration is focused on the wrong things and
even making the situation worse.
Effectively, preventing human trafficking requires changing
the root systems that leave many people vulnerable and enable
traffickers. It means prioritizing resources to investigate and
catch traffickers at home and abroad and expect trafficking to
magically stop. Taking away law enforcement manpower and
scaring people who are already vulnerable to trafficking out of
reporting suspicious activities just gives traffickers more
opportunities and more prey.
So, I want to just say thank you to the witnesses who are
here, and I look forward to this discussion about your
critically important work.
And with that, I yield back, Madam Chair.
Ms. Mace. Thank you.
I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter
from John Vithoulkas, County Manager of Henrico County,
Virginia, which thanks us for holding this hearing today and
offers solutions for our consideration.
So, without objection, it is so ordered.
Ms. Mace. I am pleased today to introduce our witnesses for
today's hearing. Our first witness today is Ms. Megan
Lundstrom, Chief Executive Officer of Polaris. Our second
witness is Ms. Melissa Snow, Executive Director at the National
Center for Missing & Exploited Children. Our third witness is
Ms. Cara Jones, Co-Founder and Chief Executive Officer of
Marinus Analytics. And our fourth witness today is Mr. Roy
Austin, Director of the Artificial Intelligence Initiative at
Howard University.
Welcome everyone, and we are pleased to have you this
afternoon. Pursuant to Committee Rule 9(g), the witnesses will
please stand and raise your right hands. This is where we make
it official.
Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony that you
are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing
but the truth, so help you God?
And let the record show that the witnesses all answered in
the affirmative. You can sit down now.
We appreciate all of you being here today and look forward
to your testimony. I just want to remind the witnesses here
that we have read your written statements and they will appear
in full in the hearing record. Please limit your oral
statements to 5 minutes this afternoon.
As a reminder, please press the button on the microphone in
front of you so that we may hear you. And when you begin to
speak, the light in front of you will turn green. After 4
minutes, it will turn yellow. And when the red light comes on,
your 5 minutes has expired, and we will ask that you please
wrap it up.
So, I will now recognize Ms. Lundstrom for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF MS. MEGAN LUNDSTROM
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER, POLARIS
Ms. Lundstrom. Thank you, Chairwoman Mace and Ranking
Member Brown and Members of the Subcommittee.
Before I ever led an organization or did work around data
and technology, I was a young, single mother fleeing a domestic
violence situation, and I ran straight into the arms of a
trafficker. What was done to me is, unfortunately, not unique.
Over the five years of my own exploitation and over a
decade of anti-trafficking work since then, I can say with
certainty that technology does not change traffickers' motives.
It changes their methods.
What I would like to do today is map the journey of a
survivor from vulnerability, to exploitation, to freedom, and
show how technology can either recreate the dynamics of
trafficking or help end them.
Trafficking begins with an unmet need: a job, family,
belonging. Traffickers meet those needs when no one else is
willing to. A decade ago, traffickers found people like me at
gas stations and bus stops. They exploited us through hotels,
prepaid gift cards, and burner phones.
Today, it is algorithmic targeting, apps, and digital
wallets. Where traffickers find us and sell us has evolved
because technology has evolved. But why they target us and
exploit us remains the same.
Ethical technology has enormous potential to combat human
trafficking. With survivor input, from day one, Polaris built a
causal AI model that identifies structural drivers of
trafficking. It shows, for example, that in the United States,
child poverty is one of the strongest predictors of
vulnerability to trafficking.
This tool allows policymakers like you to test how
interventions like childcare tax credits for working families
could reduce the risk before exploitation ever occurs. We can
use technology to change the conditions that traffickers prey
on.
As exploitation deepens, the promises fall apart and
isolation grows. Technology is often used as a part of the
control. Over the last 15 years, I have listened to survivors
describe GPS tracking, nonstop messages, online ads they never
consented to, digital payment accounts in their name they never
knew about, and nonconsensual images used to threaten and
punish them.
You see, traffickers sell the most vulnerable parts of us
to line their own pockets. Every line of data is a person's
story of vulnerability. If we use data in ways that ignore
consent, if we share it, store it, analyze it, or profit from
it without guardrails, we mirror that same dynamic. If we treat
those sorts of data--survivors' stories--as a commodity, we are
no better than the traffickers who scripted the story in the
first place. This is why all technology must be rooted in three
principles.
First, centering survivor autonomy. No technology should be
used on survivors without informed consent. Second, protecting
privacy through strong governance. Collect sparingly, store
securely, use only for legitimate anti-trafficking purposes.
And, third, pairing innovation with human expertise.
Trafficking is too complex to hand over entirely to algorithms.
It requires judgment, context, and ongoing input from people
with lived experience.
Escaping exploitation is not the end. We do not get to just
skip off into the sunset happily ever after to live our lives.
Most survivors are trying to rebuild with fewer resources than
we began with. Coerced debt, criminal records for acts we were
forced to commit, ongoing digital abuse and harassment.
Technology has the potential to empower survivors in
another way as well. Survivors need a seat at the table from
the beginning, not only so our insights shape safer tools, but
because a good-paying job is a critical part of justice. True
freedom from trafficking comes when those unmet needs are
safely and sustainably met.
Traffickers are opportunists. They will always adopt new
technology faster than systems with compliance obligations. Our
national response must be nimble to keep up, but never at the
expense of the people we aim to protect. Technology should
never be used on survivors. It should be used with and for us.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify. I look forward to
your questions.
Ms. Mace. Thank you.
I will now recognize Ms. Snow for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF MS. MELISSA SNOW
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL CENTER FOR
MISSING & EXPLOITED CHILDREN
Ms. Snow. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Mace, Ranking Member
Brown, and Members of the Subcommittee. My name is Melissa
Snow, and I am the Executive Director of Child Sex Trafficking
Programs at the National Center for Missing & Exploited
Children. NCMEC is a nonprofit organization created in 1984 by
child advocates to help find missing children, reduce child
sexual exploitation, and prevent child victimization. I am
honored to be here today to share NCMEC's perspective on modern
tools to combat human trafficking.
As part of its mission, NCMEC responds to reports of child
sex trafficking, employs crucial analytical tools to identify
and locate missing children trafficked for sex, trains law
enforcement and child welfare on child sex trafficking issues,
and provides very important recovery services support. To date,
NCMEC has responded to over 280,000 reports relating to child
sex trafficking.
Child sex trafficking occurs when a child under 18 is
advertised, solicited, or exploited through a commercial sex
act. The commercial exchange can include money, food, shelter,
drugs, or anything of value.
NCMEC has seen every type of trafficking, including
familial and nonfamilial trafficking, and trafficking that
occurs when a child runs from home or child welfare care and
exploited by traffickers and buyers. Behind every trafficking
report submitted to NCMEC is a child demonstrating incredible
resilience while facing unimaginable harm.
Child sex trafficking is a technology-facilitated crime
that occurs on the clear web. The internet provides unregulated
and anonymous spaces where traffickers and buyers can engage
with children in ways that would never be acceptable offline.
Children are often approached first and groomed by offenders on
gaming platforms and social media platforms. Traffickers and
buyers also use publicly available online escort and dating
websites, as well as social media, to advertise, sell, and
purchase children for sex.
Yet, technology is also crucial to NCMEC's efforts to
support law enforcement in locating and recovering victims of
child sex trafficking. NCMEC's child sex trafficking team
leverages technology to more quickly and efficiently identify
victims and remove them from exploitation.
We also use publicly available data tools, emerging
technologies incorporating artificial intelligence, image
matching, and sophisticated mapping techniques. For years, this
technology has been generously donated by companies to support
our mission.
For decades, NCMEC has been sounding the alarm about the
pervasiveness of child sex trafficking online. However, it was
not until the passage of the REPORT Act last year that online
platforms were finally required to report child sex trafficking
to NCMEC. As a result, the magnitude of online child sex
trafficking became even more visible.
In the first six months of this year, after the REPORT Act
became effective, child sex trafficking reports to NCMEC
increased an astonishing 952 percent. As the volume and
complexity of child sex trafficking reports continue to
increase, NCMEC relies on technology to support our efforts by
connecting crucial and nuanced data points, surfacing
connections between children and offenders, and automating the
review and flagging of child sex trafficking indicators within
missing child reports and reports made by online platforms and
the public.
Every day we use donated specialized anti-trafficking
tools, such as Traffic Jam and Spotlight, to search missing
child data and photos against online escort ads. Another
specific anti-trafficking tool, TraffickCam, allows NCMEC to
use a search feature to identify hotel rooms where child sex
trafficking victims had been photographed.
Using these innovative tools is lifesaving when we can
connect a missing child to an active online escort ad
advertising a child for sale in a specific city, and it is even
more powerful when we can narrow it to a specific hotel. Being
able to pass along a lead that is actionable for law
enforcement can mean significantly reducing the amount of time
that child is experiencing a nightmare.
Child sex trafficking is a complicated crime, and as the
volume and complexity of these cases increase, the need for
technology tools to protect and recover child victims will
continue to escalate. It is crucial that smaller providers of
anti-trafficking technology continue to have adequate resources
to sustain, expand, and update their products, and equally
important that larger tech companies devote more resources to
developing and sharing large-scale anti-trafficking technology
solutions.
Thank you for allowing NCMEC to share our insights with you
today. We look forward to continuing our work with the
Subcommittee to share information regarding how NCMEC uses
technology to combat child sex trafficking.
Ms. Mace. I will now recognize Ms. Jones for introductory
remarks.
STATEMENT OF MS. CARA JONES
CO-FOUNDER AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
MARINUS ANALYTICS
Ms. Jones. Thank you, Chairwoman Mace, Ranking Member
Brown, and Members of the Subcommittee, for inviting me.
As a computer engineer and compassionate entrepreneur, I
have led the deployment of Traffic Jam that has indexed and
analyzed over 150 commercial sexual services websites to
empower proactive safeguarding and to advance victim center
policing in the digital age.
In 2019 in Oregon, Federal agents recovered a victim living
in a small apartment with only a mattress on the floor. This
victim had no say in the customers, no control over her
schedule, and no understanding of her rights. Language barriers
and fear prevented her from asking for help.
Behind the scenes, the traffickers were running a
sophisticated operation, using data bases and custom software
to market and schedule prostitution dates. The resulting
indictment revealed bookings from a staggering 30,000 unique
customers. She and 27 other victims were brought to safety
during a nationwide takedown.
The Marinus Analytics Traffic Jam platform played a
critical role uncovering the network's online footprint and
propelling the case of one very driven Federal investigator
from a local focus into an investigation across a dozen cities.
Every year, over 75 million ads for commercial sex flood
the United States marketplace online. Hidden among them are a
vast number of victims of trafficking. With over 1.3 billion
records indexed, Traffic Jam delivers actionable insights in
seconds, connecting ads, timelines, and networks, so
investigators can focus on safeguarding and justice, not
drowning in data.
Its intelligence strengthens cases and reduces the burden
on victims and investigators, while expanding the burden of
proof. Technology turns data into a clear story, corroborating
testimony and enabling evidence-based prosecution that builds
cases around victims, not on them.
A profound innovation is using AI ethically to screen
missing persons for trafficking risk, enabling proactive
safeguarding. In just two years, analyzing 60,000 missing
persons records from 20 public sources, we detected 734
victims, 95 percent girls and young women, 84 percent victims
of color, advertised online for sexual services.
Behind these numbers are heartbreaking realities. One
missing 15-year-old was advertised for months, even through
late stages of pregnancy. Today, automated screening for such
cases means detection and recovery can happen in days, not
months.
We are also detecting the systemic sources of exploitation
preying on a growing number of adults sourced from
international countries. In the U.K., we recently launched STAR
that uses network clustering, risk scoring, and pattern
analysis to uncover controlled prostitution rings with
trafficking risk factors. STAR prioritizes these networks for
enabling improved police investigation and, again, proactive
safeguarding, an approach that could similarly strengthen
United States efforts.
I would like to end by acknowledging the fact that human
trafficking investigations remain among the most complex cases,
with victims facing deeply layered needs. Prosecutions for what
is considered one of the largest crime types are still far too
low. Yet bright spots of disruption prove that progress is
possible.
Proactive technology-driven intelligence can trigger
Federal investigations even when victims cannot ask for help.
It can link what initially seemed to be small local cases to
regional, national, and even international networks. And it can
strengthen a victim's story by supporting it with a footprint
of online proof, advancing evidence-led prosecutions.
Through this contribution, we are committed to amplifying
the momentum of regional task forces and frontline champions in
the field, and we welcome continued dialog beyond this hearing
to advance this vital mission together.
Thank you.
Ms. Mace. Thank you.
I will now recognize Mr. Austin for introductory remarks.
STATEMENT OF MR. ROY L. AUSTIN JR.
DIRECTOR, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE INITIATIVE
HOWARD UNIVERSITY
Mr. Austin. Chairwoman Mace, Ranking Member Brown, and
distinguished Members of the Subcommittee----
Ms. Mace. Your mic.
Mr. Austin. For more than two decades, my career has
involved fighting human trafficking and supporting its
survivors. As a Federal Prosecutor in Washington, D.C., I
helped bring one of the city's first human trafficking
prosecutions and helped launch the D.C. Human Trafficking Task
Force. Later, as a Deputy Assistant Attorney General in the
Civil Rights Division, I supervised the human trafficking
prosecution unit. Today, as Director of the Howard University
School of Law's Artificial Intelligence Initiative, and as a
longtime board member of Polaris, I continue this work from the
perspective of law, policy, and technology.
No one, no one is more committed than I am to ensuring
traffickers are identified, prosecuted, and convicted through
lawful and ethical means. I hold firmly to the 1935 admonition
from Supreme Court Justice George Sutherland, ``But while a
prosecutor may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to
strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from
improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as
it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just
one.''
While I support the use of legitimate tools to end human
trafficking, I have several concerns with artificial
intelligence as a tool, each rooted in experience and
principle. Only with necessary guardrails, including national
standards, transparency, and oversight, can we ensure that
artificial intelligence does not become another instrument of
harm.
Artificial intelligence systems and agents are only as
sound as the data upon which they are trained. Quality data
must be accurate, comprehensive, and disaggregated. They must
reflect the lived realities of all communities. Too often,
datasets used to detect trafficking contain incomplete and
biased information. This can distort results, misdirect
investigations, and perpetuate racial and gender disparities.
In an area where vendors are often the tail that wags the dog,
we need clear Federal standards on data transparency, auditing,
and accountability.
I am also deeply concerned with the proliferation of
surveillance-based tools, from facial recognition to predictive
algorithms. They are being used without sufficient safeguards.
These technologies have well-documented accuracy gaps and can
expand beyond their intended scope. Congress should ask, how
long is human trafficking surveillance data retained? Who can
access it? How is it used once a case is closed? Without strict
limits, surveillance risks violating privacy while failing to
deliver justice.
Human trafficking survivors deserve not only freedom, but
dignity. Often minors or vulnerable adults, survivors must not
be exposed through unwarranted data collection or retention
that can come back to hurt them later in life. Survivor data
should be encrypted, minimized, and used strictly for their
protection. We must ensure that technology never retraumatizes
those it aims to protect.
The rapid advancement of synthetic media creates new
dangers. Deepfakes are fake but so close to reality that they
make people believe that they are real. Deepfakes will
compromise investigations, destroy reputations, and undermine
evidentiary integrity. Congress has an essential role in
addressing how deepfakes can be used, and we need to promote
research on deepfake detection.
I am concerned with the burden that will be borne most by
survivors and not by those who take advantage of them.
Trafficking has always been both a supply-and-demand issue. But
the demand side rarely faces the most risk for its conduct.
Will artificial intelligence just further exacerbate this
inequality?
With over 30 years of legal practice experience, I have
come to the conclusion that the single-most important aspect of
a legal system is trust. People have to trust that the legal
system will follow the rule of law and treat all individuals
equally and respectfully.
I am concerned because of the way the current
Administration has been treating immigrants. All of us are well
aware that a significant amount of human trafficking involves
the immigrant community, whether sex or labor trafficking, in
massage parlors, brothels, salons, farms, and plants. If the
immigrant community does not feel comfortable going to and/or
working with law enforcement, these cases will be even harder
to successfully investigate or prosecute.
I know this because I have seen this. I was an Assistant
United States Attorney in Washington, D.C., in the early 2000s
when two Metropolitan Police Department officers brought
evidence of trafficking to me. The reason we were able to
prosecute that case, one of the first prosecuted in D.C., was
because multiple survivors trusted law enforcement enough to
report the pimp to them and then to remain witnesses despite
feeling threatened by him.
What that case and dozens of other cases I was involved
with required was humanity, not technology. That humanity must
never be replaced.
Ms. Mace. Thank you.
And I will now recognize myself for 5 minutes.
Ms. Snow, I would like to start with you and NCMEC. How
many kids are missing, roughly, do we know?
Ms. Snow. I can speak to the number of missing child
reports that NCMEC receives.
Ms. Mace. Okay.
Ms. Snow. So, last year we received over 29,000 reports.
Ms. Mace. Just in one year?
Ms. Snow. In one year.
Ms. Mace. And what is the total?
Ms. Snow. That are reported missing? So, within National
Crime Information Systems (NCIC), so the data base where law
enforcement is reporting children missing, there are roughly
around 500,000 children.
Ms. Mace. And then what percentage of those do you think
you have in your data are repeat offenders, like for a lot of
these children?
Ms. Snow. Yes. We do see situations, especially children
that are missing from child welfare care, where they may go
missing multiple times and be reported to us multiple times.
Ms. Mace. Do you know what percentage of children are--fit
that category?
Ms. Snow. I do not have the exact number of the repeat
missing incidents that are reported to us, but that is
certainly something we could followup on.
Ms. Mace. And then how--when NCMEC gets evidence, how is
it--how is it stored? Who has access to it? How are these
individuals protected, the victims?
Ms. Snow. Absolutely. So, an important question. I think
what is important too is to maybe talk a little bit about how
NCMEC becomes involved in these cases.
So, when NCMEC receives a report from a parent, legal
guardian, law enforcement, or a member of child welfare who is
reaching out to report a child missing, of course, they have
first reported that to law enforcement and then reached out to
NCMEC voluntarily to make a secondary report. At that point, we
then become involved with intaking that case and then
leveraging a suite of resources to provide support.
Ms. Mace. So, let us talk in theory, a hypothetical. Let us
say somebody found a tape, a recording of a child or someone
who looked over 12 but under 18, reported it to state law
enforcement authorities. Would they then go to NCMEC and NCMEC
then get involved, for example, or if it has already been
reported to state authorities, does NCMEC not get involved?
Does that make sense?
Ms. Snow. Sure. So, at that point, if law enforcement were
to reach out to NCMEC and request certain assistance regarding
their investigation into that, we would be available to
provide----
Ms. Mace. What kind of tools does NCMEC have in
investigations to use, sort of figure some of this stuff out?
Ms. Snow. So, in terms of--so I think you are talking a
little bit more on the child sexual abuse materials side. So, I
can speak to that briefly and then in terms of other colleagues
of mine that have a little bit more----
Ms. Mace. But they could be trafficked? I mean----
Ms. Snow. Certainly.
Ms. Mace [continuing]. If you find videos of children and
sexual abuse.
Ms. Snow. Absolutely. So, we do see a connection between
child sexual abuse material and child sex trafficking. So,
depending on if that child is known or unknown--so there are
certain resources; certainly Traffic Jam and Spotlight. If we
are trying to identify if that child may be involved in
trafficking and may be featured in an online escort ad, we are
going to leverage some tools that have resources for making
that connection.
Ms. Mace. Does NCMEC do like forensic interviews with some
of these children or is that a process of law enforcement?
Ms. Snow. That is process solely of law enforcement and
forensic interviewers that are connected outside of that
system.
Ms. Mace. And then in terms of technology and trying to
find the children who are victims of human trafficking, what
has been the best case scenar---what have you seen that has
been very much working to the betterment of these victims with
the advances of technology we see today?
Ms. Snow. Yes. Thank you so much for that question.
I think there are three tools that I mentioned--Spotlight,
Traffic Jam, and TraffickCam--that we use every single day in
making connections between active missing children that are
actively being exploited. And so, you know, with these being
with small companies, it is so important that there are
continued resources to support the innovation, the expansion,
the growth, and then the ability to keep up with the trends in
the field to ensure that we can continue to evolve with the
offenders.
Ms. Mace. And then someone said earlier, technology should
not be used on survivors. Was that Ms. Lundstrom or was that
Ms. Snow? Who said that?
Ms. Lundstrom. That was me.
Ms. Mace. That was you? That really struck a chord with me.
Can you just expand on that a little bit, how technology should
not be used on survivors? Do you mean in terms of like when
they come forward and--what do you mean? Can you expand on that
for me?
Ms. Lundstrom. So, in terms of data collection, there comes
a point at which it is extractive, the amount of information
that is collected from survivors for the sole purpose of just
having information, as opposed to making sure that an
organization or an entity has the information necessary to meet
the survivors' needs. And then when it comes to identifying
trafficking, a very fine line, as Roy spoke about, where we tip
into surveillance, and survivors are already experiencing
surveillance by our traffickers.
Ms. Mace. And what do you think about the use of, in like
depositions, of a survivor or a victim being filmed to get
their responses when there is like an investigation or a
prosecution or a civil suit? How traumatizing is that for
victims?
Ms. Lundstrom. I cannot speak to all victims, but what I
can share is, especially in cases where child sex abuse
materials or pornography has been involved in their
exploitation, things like recording can bring up a trauma
response and feel reexploitative. And, so, that is why it is so
important to have a trauma-informed approach to be transparent
with that survivor to provide multiple options for recording,
explain where it is going to be stored, who is going to access
it, and when it will be destroyed.
Ms. Mace. Just one last question, if you do not mind. I
will give you 30 seconds more.
How many states do trauma-informed investigations, do you
think?
Ms. Lundstrom. I do not know that number off the top of my
head.
Ms. Mace. Okay. Thank you.
And I yield back and 38 extra seconds to my colleague, Ms.
Brown.
Ms. Brown. Thank you, Chairwoman.
Given the gravity of the crime and the life-altering impact
it has on survivors, we must leverage all available
technologies to combat human trafficking. But the government
must deploy these tools responsibly, trafficking targets that
are vulnerable, and we must ensure that our tools empower law
enforcement without harming survivors.
So, Ms. Lundstrom, can you speak briefly to the importance
of supporting survivors when adopting any technology to combat
human trafficking?
And then, Ms. Snow, I am going to ask you to followup and
discuss how your company's platforms are designed to avoid bias
and keep survivors' needs front and center.
Ms. Lundstrom. Do you mind restating the question?
Ms. Brown. Yes, sure. Can you speak briefly to the
importance of supporting survivors when adopting any technology
to combat human trafficking?
Ms. Lundstrom. Absolutely. So, I can just share the example
around our causal AI model and how Polaris has approached that.
The build from that and, like all of our work, has come from
listening to survivors over the last 23 years. Eighteen of
those years was around listening to survivors through the
National Human Trafficking Hotline. And so, understanding the
needs of survivors and the experiences of survivors is where we
come into the creation of anything.
So, when we first started creating that model, we asked
survivors to come to the table and brainstorm as thought
partners from day one. From that time forward, survivors have
continued to be involved at varying levels and in different
ways around as we have designed and continue to build out and
test that model, and they will continue to be involved.
So, our priority at Polaris is compensating survivors
anytime they are providing input because that lived experience
is a very unique skill set and expertise. So, that is very high
level how we have done it, and we have replicated that practice
across all of our programs and initiatives.
Ms. Brown. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Ms. Snow. Yes, thank you so much for your question.
I will provide one example that I think highlights our
commitment to including survivors at the table from the
beginning and ensuring we are avoiding bias and blind spots in
what we are doing.
So, every single missing child report that is made to NCMEC
is screened for possible child sex trafficking. And the way
that we have developed that risk assessment tool was, you know,
with subject matter experts as well as survivors over the last
decade, where we have routinely involved them in the review of
those screening indicators, ensuring that we do not have blind
spots or bias as we are creating that.
Recently, we just transferred that lived experience
information and subject matter expertise into a tool that is
now being leveraged to screen missing child cases, as well as
the information that is coming in from cyber tip line reports,
by Electronic Service Provider (ESP)s, and members of the
public, to make sure that we are looking across all entities
and connecting data in ways that can surface concerns as well
as trafficking indicators. So, that is one example about how we
have continued to include survivors along the way to ensure
that we are avoiding those pitfalls.
Ms. Brown. Thank you.
And, Ms. Jones, same question. You need me to repeat it?
Ms. Jones. Please do.
Ms. Brown. So, can you please discuss how your company's
platforms are designed to avoid bias and keep survivors' needs
front and center?
Ms. Jones. Well, one thing I will say is that we are in
service to the front-line professionals who operate our tool.
In many of the use cases, it is really just to recall the
important insights that are relevant to the case. So, it is
just AI to help recall information, and then the user can
discern the true positives versus false positives, looking at
other elements of the evidence to corroborate its accuracy.
And the other--the concern about bias, I will also just
bring up this example. We are concerned about underserving the
victims. So, in this journey, we have long thought about
helping identify missing vulnerable youth, but for many years,
the capabilities were not operationally effective yet. And when
image search tools became available and there was concern
about, you know, how they were trained and their effectiveness,
it is about protecting the victims' civil rights by finding
that information and having first responders support those
victims who cannot ask for help.
So, the limitations in the model, you know, resulted in the
inability to uncover those important insights to then react and
recover victims. So, over the years, those models, like image
processing, have gotten stronger and it has led to a greater
recovery of trafficked children.
The other thing I will just say is that we work very
closely with the experts who understand kind of the elements of
control and vulnerability, and what we try to do is just save
time in the way we put these algorithms together so that they
are able to maximize their efforts and nothing is a blind box
or a black box. It is just, you know, pulling more records
together in a time-efficient way so that they have the
information they can then review and make expert decisions on
how to use.
Ms. Brown. Okay. Thank you.
And that seems to have exhausted my time, so I yield back.
Thank you.
Ms. Mace. I will now recognize Representative Burlison for
5 minutes.
Mr. Burlison. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you for
hosting this. This is such an important topic.
Human trafficking has got to be the most heinous crime
imaginable, if not one of. It is just unbelievable. I mean, it
is not exactly the topic you want to talk about every day. But
it is important--it is one of the most important things we can
and should be doing. And so I am glad that we are having this
hearing.
I am also really somewhat inspired by the innovative things
that you all are doing to kind of approach this issue, which is
fantastic. So, I wanted to hear from you today a little bit
more about what is working and what is not working.
And I will begin by asking question of Ms. Snow. How does--
can you walk me through what your AI process is and how does it
identify a potential trafficking case?
Ms. Snow. Absolutely. Thank you so much for your question.
So, in terms of how NCMEC is currently utilizing AI--and,
of course, there is a variety of different ways, but one that I
will mention right now. So, as we are continuing to receive an
increase in volume, especially in our reports, we have
identified that we need to make sure that we are creating a
safety net, right, to leverage and make sure that all of the
data points--so in a missing child case we can have--in a
single missing child case we can have 500 unique data points.
In a single cyber tip line report we can have up to a thousand
data points. And so, the reality of being able to make those
nuanced connections that can surface clear indicators of
possible child sex trafficking is something that is exceeding
human capacity with the volume of reports that we have.
So, by now layering in an AI component, specifically on the
missing child cases that we have reported to us, it has allowed
us to implement a system, again, that is leveraging decades of
subject matter expertise and survivor knowledge, to pull the
nuanced data points that, you know--of course, when we find an
online escort ad, that is a clear indicator. But there are a
lot of other nuanced indicators that we now know that, when we
stack them together, create a more reliable indicator of
possible trafficking.
Mr. Burlison. Okay. So, are you also pulling data from,
say, like AMBER Alerts or--any of the data that is gathered
from any kind of child abduction?
Ms. Snow. So, if there was a situation where we identified,
within a family abduction or a child abduction case, that there
was likely indicators of trafficking, that would be, of course,
a part of that process.
Mr. Burlison. Okay. Let me ask you this. Why--why do these
traffickers, apparently from your written testimony, you said
that they are often on the open web. You would think that they
would be doing this on the dark web. Why would they be so
brazen to do it on the open web?
Ms. Snow. Yes. Thank you for your question. And really the
very simple answer to that is that is where the kids are,
right. Traffickers are going to be in places where they can
have access to children and where they can begin to identify
the vulnerabilities that those children are sharing that allows
an entry point for a trafficker to then take advantage of that.
Mr. Burlison. So, I am a father of two daughters. We try to
lock down as much social media and as much access as possible
because of that. Because, you know, just fear for this. But
what advice do you have for parents like us that really just
want to keep your kids safe and--what should also as a parent
be aware of? If your child is--like, what social media apps are
at most risk or where--where are the children most at risk?
Ms. Snow. Yes. I appreciate that question, and empathize as
a parent as well.
So, NCMEC has a variety of resources, prevention tools,
called NetSmartz. And that provides parents, teachers,
concerned and trusted adults, with a whole suite of resources
that you can utilize to engage, you know, kids of all ages in
online safety conversations that are absolutely crucial to be
having as early as possible.
Mr. Burlison. Because the traffickers, basically, open up
the line of communication or some kind of dialog and then they
go from there.
Ms. Snow. Absolutely.
Mr. Burlison. Ms. Lundstrom, what is your process? Like,
when you are sharing data with law enforcement, how do you do
that without compromising the victim's privacy? How do you work
collaboratively with law enforcement?
Ms. Lundstrom. Thank you for that question, and happy to
answer it.
In running the National Human Trafficking Hotline for the
last 18 years, our team has developed over 300 protocols around
identifying trafficking situations and determining whether or
not a situation needs to be reported to law enforcement. So, we
start, first and foremost, with the laws, recognizing that we
are mandated reporters and we have a duty to report instances
that involve individuals who are suspected to be under the age
of 18, are at imminent harm or danger, and when survivors want
to report.
And so, we have an entire protocol around that
decisionmaking process that we have used, and it is very
nuanced. That sounds very simple, and the reality is that it is
not.
So, one of the examples that I like to share to give a
little bit more context to that decision is, what if we have a
survivor that calls in on behalf of several other survivors,
and we are able to get the caller's consent, but we cannot
confirm if the other survivors who are maybe all over the age
of 18 want to report to law enforcement as well? So, those
protocols really break down how to best make those decisions.
Mr. Burlison. Okay. Thank you.
My time has expired. I yield back.
Ms. Mace. Thank you.
I will now recognize Mr. Subramanyam for 5 minutes.
Mr. Subramanyam. Thank you, Madam Chair.
I think everyone agrees this is an incredibly difficult,
complex but important problem we have to solve. And I think it
is affecting 27 million people, I think last I saw, across the
world. And, you know, I really appreciate all the work that
this panel is doing to combat it using cutting-edge technology.
But I am very concerned right now by what is going on in
this Administration with gutting so many different Federal
grant programs and so many different offices that fight
trafficking across the world and across our country. And, you
know, I will just read out some of these.
The Department of State, the Department of Justice, the
Department of Labor, the Department of Health and Human
Services, the Department of Homeland Security, have all cut
funding or programs or people working on trying to fight human
trafficking.
And I think there are 69 international programs aimed at
combating child labor, forced labor, and human trafficking that
were terminated. Seventy percent of the workforce at the State
Department's agency in charge with monitoring and combating
trafficking was cut. The Department of Labor cut $500 million
in grant programs for programs used to combat trafficking. And
I can keep going, but you get my point.
Mr. Austin, is it waste, fraud, and abuse to cut all these
programs? Are we cutting waste, fraud, and abuse by doing that?
What are we accomplishing by cutting these programs?
Mr. Austin. We are hurting the effort to actually try to
stop human trafficking. We are moving resources where they do
not need to be, such as nonviolent immigrants, when we really
need enormous resources if we are actually going to do
something about human trafficking.
Mr. Subramanyam. One of the grant programs was aimed at
training law enforcement on investigating trafficking,
particularly involving people with disabilities. Could you
explain the importance of that? That was cut as well.
Mr. Austin. I mean, it is enormous, because people with
disabilities are particularly vulnerable to trafficking, and so
you need to have programs that actually meet the needs. So,
understanding the needs, understanding the type of people who
are being trafficked, you must have programs that actually dig
into that and answer those questions.
You cannot do this work through just technology. You have
to have humans. You have to have human beings who are actually
making the evaluations. You have to know the types of people
who are being trafficked and the people who are doing the
trafficking.
Mr. Subramanyam. I am trying to make the argument for why
they would cut these programs. Perhaps, maybe the government
should not be involved in fighting human trafficking. I do not
know. What are your thoughts on--what is the impact of cutting
both these programs? As well as we have cut jobs for
technologists across the Federal Government, and we are now
having trouble recruiting and retaining technologists as well.
So, we are talking about the intersection of technology and
fighting trafficking. Right now we are not going to be doing a
very good job in the Federal Government on this.
Could you explain to me sort of what the role should be?
What should we be doing as a Federal Government to fight
trafficking?
Mr. Austin. As a Federal Prosecutor, we needed more
resources. We needed more information. We needed more Non-
Governmental Organizations (NGOs) who could provide us with
information. We needed more technologists who could help us
with these things.
If we really and truly care about these issues, our budget
really determines where--you know, what we care about. And,
right now, what our budget is saying is that we really do not
care about these things and that we are going to allow them to
happen, which is really problematic after hearing the
unbelievable testimony from my fellows on this panel. You know,
we need to be putting more effort into this, and right now we
are putting less.
Mr. Subramanyam. Did I miss any programs that were cut that
you think are worth highlighting?
Mr. Austin. The entire Civil Rights Division.
Mr. Subramanyam. Tell me more about that.
Mr. Austin. I mean, we had the Human Trafficking Protection
Unit under the Civil Rights Division. It was moved, but it was
never big enough. It belongs in the Civil Rights Division. The
work that it does in schools, the work that it does on housing,
the work that it does on employment, are all relevant to the
fight against human trafficking. And you dismantle the Civil
Rights Division, and you dismantle one of the main tools that
could be used to help survivors.
Mr. Subramanyam. I request unanimous consent to enter into
the record a September 17, 2025, article entitled, ``Revealed:
Trump Administration retreats on combating human trafficking
and child exploitation.''
Ms. Mace. So ordered.
Mr. Subramanyam. And so, I think if we are going to
actually take this problem seriously, then we are going to have
to put some funding and put some good people behind this effort
to combat trafficking.
I love the idea of using technology to address this issue.
We should use technology. We should use human beings. We should
use partnerships with law enforcement at local, state level,
and around the world. This is an all-hands-on-deck effort that
we will need to fight trafficking, but we are not going to do
it if this Administration continues to retreat on combating
human trafficking and child exploitation.
I yield back.
Ms. Mace. All right. Thank you.
And in closing, I want to thank our panelists once again
for their testimony today.
I would like to yield to the Ranking Member, Ms. Brown, for
closing remarks.
Ms. Brown. Thank you so much, Madam Chair.
I think what we discovered today, that there are many
modern tools available to combat human trafficking, and they
rely on large amounts of data. Law enforcement must monitor
enormous amounts of internet activity to identify predators, as
they are looking for a few extremely dangerous needles in an
enormous, an enormous haystack.
Instead of investigating and catching traffickers, this
Administration has prioritized sending unidentified masked men
into our communities to stoke fear and detain whomever they
like at random. In fact, they have pulled law enforcement away
from critical missions, including fighting transnational
criminal terrorist organizations and organized crime, only to
have them support street-level work, detaining people at
traffic stops and monitoring student protestors.
The data shows that this Administration has diverted more
than 28,000 law enforcement agents for their supposed crackdown
on immigration. And according to The New York Times, between
February and April of this year, Homeland Security worked 33
percent less cases of child exploitation cases than in the
previous years.
So, I say all that to remind everyone listening and paying
attention, yes, modern technology can unlock critical
opportunities in the fight against human trafficking.
Unfortunately, the President and his Administration has
prioritized terrorizing American communities over protecting
the vulnerable who suffer the most from human trafficking. So,
it is my hope that we can find some bipartisan solutions to
address this critical issue that is impacting so many.
I want to thank the witnesses again for their incredible
work.
And with that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
Ms. Mace. Thank you.
With that, without objection, all Members will have 5
legislative days within which to submit materials and to submit
additional written questions for the witnesses which will be
forwarded to the witnesses for their response.
If there is no further business, without objection, the
Subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:35 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[all]