[Congressional Record Volume 164, Number 35 (Tuesday, February 27, 2018)]
[House]
[Pages H1290-H1305]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  ALLOW STATES AND VICTIMS TO FIGHT ONLINE SEX TRAFFICKING ACT OF 2017


                             General Leave

  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may 
have 5 legislative days in which to revise and extend their remarks and 
include extraneous material on H.R. 1865.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Alabama?
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to House Resolution 748 and rule 
XVIII, the Chair declares the House in the Committee of the Whole House 
on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1865.
  The Chair appoints the gentleman from California (Mr. Denham) to 
preside over the Committee of the Whole.

                              {time}  1409


                     In the Committee of the Whole

  Accordingly, the House resolved itself into the Committee of the 
Whole House on the state of the Union for the consideration of the bill 
(H.R. 1865) to amend the Communications Act of 1934 to clarify that 
section 230 of such Act does not prohibit the enforcement against 
providers and users of interactive computer services of Federal and 
State criminal and civil law relating to sexual exploitation of 
children or sex trafficking, and for other purposes, with Mr. Denham in 
the chair.
  The Clerk read the title of the bill.
  The CHAIR. Pursuant to the rule, the bill is considered read the 
first time.
  The gentlewoman from Alabama (Mrs. Roby) and the gentlewoman from 
Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Alabama.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Chairman, today, this body will make tremendous progress towards 
ending online sex exploitation. This is a big deal.
  I am proud to stand here as an original cosponsor of the important 
legislation we are considering today, H.R. 1865, the Allow States and 
Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act.
  I have been so pleased to work closely with my colleague, 
Congresswoman Ann Wagner, on this issue, and I know that I am not the 
only person here who greatly appreciates her leadership on this. It has 
been sobering, to say the least, to hear some of the personal accounts 
of sex trafficking victims, and several from my home State of Alabama.

[[Page H1291]]

  It is our responsibility to provide justice for these victims and to 
do everything we can to protect the most vulnerable members of our 
society from trafficking. This is modern-day slavery.
  As it stands now, the sad truth is that criminals can easily and 
anonymously purchase women and children on the internet using various 
websites.
  Thanks to broad interpretation of existing law, specifically section 
230 in America's courts, these websites are, essentially, immune from 
State and local prosecutions. These websites make millions by enabling 
sex trafficking while facing very little risk of being punished for 
these crimes.
  The bill we are considering today would change that by amending this 
law to ensure that websites that unlawfully contribute to the 
exploitation of sex trafficking victims are no longer immune to 
punishment.
  H.R. 1865 will finally hold bad actor websites accountable for these 
unspeakable wrongdoings. The bill also provides increased criminal 
liability and, thus, deters websites and individuals from selling human 
beings online. Websites will no longer be able to turn a blind eye or 
actively conceal this horrific practice without facing very real 
consequences.
  This legislation has been a work in progress for some time now, and I 
am excited today to have the opportunity to cast my vote in favor of it 
here today. I urge my colleagues to join me.
  Mr. Chairman, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  Mr. Chairman, let me thank the gentlewoman from Alabama for managing 
this legislation. I thank Congresswoman Wagner for her leadership and, 
as someone said, continued determination, joined by my friend and 
colleague from Ohio, Congresswoman Beatty and Congresswoman Maloney. We 
have all worked together over the years for the victims of human 
trafficking and sex trafficking.
  In the last couple of hours, we heard in the Judiciary Committee the 
stories of the victims of rape, so we know that this is an important 
time and important legislation. Throughout this time, you will hear 
stories of victims who have been victimized and are in need of this 
legislation.
  Just to recount my statement in the Rules Committee, yesterday, 
Monday, a week ago, in Houston, I sat down with victims who had been 
trafficked or who had been victimized through online sex trafficking or 
other aspects of sex trafficking. It was overwhelming to hear parents 
speak of a young girl, their daughter, who had been misled and driven 
away from their home or from her area and had been taken and abused for 
a long period of time until he had to rescue her himself, spending 
$50,000, and then $60,000, to be able to rehabilitate herself, which is 
now an ongoing process. Though, as every family and every parent, he is 
grateful that she is alive.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of H.R. 1865, Allow States and 
Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017, an important bill 
intended to address the reprehensible crime of online sex trafficking 
by prosecuting the violators and providing relief to the violated.

                              {time}  1415

  First and foremost, H.R. 1865 makes clear that section 230 of the 
Communications Decency Act, which its interpretation was expanded in 
the first circuit court ruling of Doe v. Backpage, this bill makes it 
clear that section 230 of the Communications Decency Act was never 
intended to protect the facilitation of online prostitution or sex 
trafficking and calls out those websites that have acted recklessly in 
allowing the sale of victims of sex trafficking online or stood idly by 
while young boys and girls, many as young as 13 years old or even 
younger, were coerced, threatened, tortured, bought, and sold on the 
whims of their exploiters.
  Secondly, this legislation will provide Federal prosecutors with an 
additional weapon to use against the immoral individuals who 
participate in the forced enslavement we know as sex trafficking.
  H.R. 1865 creates the new offense of intentional promotion or 
facilitation of prostitution while using or operating a facility or 
means of interstate or foreign commerce, such as the internet. A 
general violation of this offense will be punishable by a sentence of 
upwards of 10 years.
  Websites have operated with impunity, hidden behind section 230, 
allowing traffickers to advertise, promote, sell minors and other 
vulnerable at-risk members of our society, children, parents' precious, 
precious children, who are forced to perform unspeakable acts under the 
threat of violence, gun violence, starvation, and emotional and 
physical abuse.
  Under this legislation, an aggravated violation of the new offense, 
punishable by imprisonment, occurs if a defendant, such as Backpage, 
promotes or facilitates the prostitution of five or more victims or 
acts with reckless disregard of the fact that the conduct in question 
contributed to sex trafficking as defined in the Federal criminal code 
at section 1591, title 18.
  Not only does H.R. 1865 create criminal liability and mandatory 
restitution for online sex traffickers and their enablers, this 
legislation goes even further. Victims harmed as a result of an 
aggravated violation of this new offense will have the ability--very 
important--to seek civil damages, while judges will be required to 
impose restitution upon defendants convicted of committing either the 
general or aggravated violation.
  We appreciate law enforcement, U.S. attorneys, yet we know that State 
law enforcement agencies and prosecutors are vital in the fight as 
well, and they have called on Congress to act and to fight more 
effectively. There are State task forces across the country working to 
protect young girls and boys, and H.R. 1865 allows State legislators to 
enact laws prohibiting the conduct that reflects the offense created in 
this bill.
  Soon we will be discussing the Walters amendment, which is offered 
because of the victims groups who want a stronger response to helping 
victims. We thank them for that.
  The Jackson Lee amendment, which I will offer, leads to be able to 
help understand what the level of recovery is and the mandatory 
restitution. It will tell the story. It will provide the GAO study to 
find out how this legislation is positively impacting, who is receiving 
the dollars, are they receiving the dollars.
  Today, this account has swelled to $99 billion a year, with a 
considerable portion of that money being generated through online 
advertising solicitation, and that is the account of dollars that are 
being used through sex trafficking.
  My amendment will determine and help to bring information to us as to 
the effectiveness of this particular legislation, and I think it will 
be very important.
  Let me conclude by saying that a letter to Congress from the National 
Association of Attorneys General indicated certain Federal courts have 
broadly interpreted the Communications Decency Act, which has left 
victims and State and local law enforcement agencies and prosecutors, 
who regularly confront the cruel realities of sex trafficking, feeling 
powerless against online ad services and websites that facilitate or 
allow sex trafficking.
  My heart goes out, and I am grateful that we have moved. As we move 
forward, we will be able to build with more legislation that might 
include my second amendment that would have allowed victims of sex 
trafficking to file civil actions in State courts.
  Mr. Chair, let me express my gratitude to the victims who have been 
courageous enough to tell their story.
  Mr. Chair, I rise in support of H.R. 1865, the ``Allow States and 
Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017,'' an important 
bill, intended to address the reprehensible crime of online sex 
trafficking by prosecuting the violators and providing relief to the 
violated.
  First and foremost, H.R. 1865:
  (1) Makes clear that Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act 
was never intended to protect the facilitation of online prostitution 
or sex trafficking; and
  (2) Calls out those websites that have acted recklessly in allowing 
the sale of victims of sex trafficking online, or stood idly by while 
young boys and girls--many as young as thirteen years old or even 
younger--were coerced, threatened, tortured, bought, and sold on the 
whims of their exploiters.
  Secondly, this legislation will provide federal prosecutors with an 
additional weapon to use against the immoral individuals who 
participate

[[Page H1292]]

in the forced enslavement we know as sex trafficking.
  H.R. 1865 creates the new offense of intentional promotion or 
facilitation of prostitution while using or operating a facility or 
means of interstate or foreign commerce, such as the Internet.
  A general violation of this offense will be punishable by a sentence 
of imprisonment of up to ten years.
  Websites have operated with impunity and hidden behind Section 230--
allowing traffickers to advertise, promote, and sell minors and other 
vulnerable, at risk members of our society, who are forced to perform 
unspeakable acts under the threat of violence, starvation, and 
emotional and physical abuse.
  Under this legislation, an aggravated violation of the new offense, 
punishable by a maximum of twenty-five years imprisonment, occurs if a 
defendant, such as Backpage.com:
  (1) Promotes or facilitates the prostitution of five or more victims; 
or
  (2) Acts with reckless disregard of the fact that the conduct in 
question contributed to sex trafficking, as defined in the federal 
criminal code at section 1591 of title 18.
  Not only does H.R. 1865 create criminal liability and mandatory 
restitution for online sex traffickers and their enablers, this 
legislation goes even further.
  Victims harmed as a result of an aggravated violation of this new 
offense will have the ability to seek civil damages, while judges will 
be required to impose restitution upon defendants convicted of 
committing either the general or aggravated violation.
  We appreciate the efforts of federal law enforcement and assistant 
U.S. attorneys who endeavor to rid the streets and virtual highways of 
sex trafficking.
  Yet we know that state law enforcement agencies and prosecutors are 
vital to this fight as well, and they have called on Congress to help 
them fight more effectively.
  There are state task forces across the country working on the 
frontlines to locate young girls and young boys--children--and return 
them to the arms of distraught mothers and fathers.
  H.R. 1865 allows state legislatures to enact laws prohibiting conduct 
that reflects the offenses created in this bill and the existing sex 
trafficking statute that I previously mentioned.
  Congresswoman Walters has offered an amendment, which is supported by 
many victims' advocacy groups, to further strengthen the legislation 
before us today.
  Taking two key provisions from the Senate bill, known as SESTA, the 
Walters amendment makes clear that the Communications Decency Act does 
not impair or limit federal causes of action filed by victims of sex 
trafficking and creates a right of action for state attorneys general 
to file federal causes of action for sex trafficking on behalf of their 
citizens.
  This leads me to my own amendment, which is intended to measure the 
effectiveness of the civil recovery and mandatory restitution 
provisions of H.R. 1865.
  In every community across the country, soulless individuals bend, 
break, and use the minds and bodies of young girls, young boys, men, 
and women--for a profit--over and over and over again.
  Despite the reprehensible nature of this crime, sex trafficking is a 
widespread problem that is now the fastest growing criminal industry.
  Today, it has swelled to $99 billion a year--with a considerable 
portion of that money being generated through online advertising and 
solicitation.
  Sex traffickers have harnessed the wide-reaching expanse of the 
Internet together with the ability to conduct their so-called business 
anonymously.
  They are no longer restricted to dark, unsafe street corners, filthy 
truck stops, or seedy hotels and strip clubs.
  Instead, websites have made sex trafficking easy, convenient, and 
less risky for traffickers and their cowardly customers.
  Today, visitors to websites can scroll through virtual Yellow Pages 
of listings, on their cell phones or tablets, according to their 
location, tastes, and preferences, without leaving the privacy and 
safety of their homes.
  According to the Polaris Project, U.S. law enforcement has identified 
online advertisements as the primary platform for buying and selling 
sex with minors. Over the past several years, more than 80 percent of 
the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children's reports 
regarding child sex trafficking relate to the sex trafficking of a 
child online.
  When notified of the criminal activity occurring on their websites 
and platforms, many companies, have worked to remove the content and 
even collaborated with law enforcement to find the perpetrators and 
rescue victims.
  On the other hand, there are companies that have made every effort to 
obfuscate the criminal nature of the activity that is allowed to 
continue unabated, while the companies continue to turn a profit, and 
traffickers continue to force their captives to perform sex acts, under 
the threat of violence and actual physical and emotional abuse.
  Girls and boys, men and women, are brazenly advertised and sold for 
sex on roughly a dozen major websites--the most notorious of these is, 
of course, Backpage.com.
  However, local law enforcement officials in Seattle, Washington have 
identified more than 130 websites where mostly women and children are 
bought and sold for sex.
  Many attempts have been made to hold these websites, including 
Backpage.com, accountable for allowing sex traffickers to operate on 
their platforms and profiting from their conduct.
  However, as was pointed out in a letter to Congress from The National 
Association of Attorneys General: ``certain federal courts have broadly 
interpreted the Communications Decency Act,'' which has left victims 
and state and local law enforcement agencies and prosecutors, who 
regularly confront the cruel realities of sex trafficking, feeling 
powerless against online ad services and websites that facilitate or 
allow sex trafficking.
  My heart aches for those who are taken advantage of, abused, robbed 
of their innocence, and then robbed again of the justice they seek.
  As I said earlier, the legislation before us will allow victims to 
file civil actions in federal courts under certain conditions and my 
amendment will determine if the civil actions are delivering relief and 
restoration.
  I offered a second amendment that would have allowed victims of sex 
trafficking to file civil actions in state courts under the same 
conditions set forth in the underlying bill for federal civil actions.
  Although I am disappointed that this amendment was not accepted, I 
look forward to building upon the work that has been done to address 
the needs of victims and survivors of sex trafficking, and introducing 
additional legislation to continue along the pathway towards a 
comprehensive solution.
  I am inspired and energized by the countless survivors who, despite 
their suffering, are willing to stand against those who have exploited 
them. These brave individuals want justice and I want them to have it.
  As a leader in the fight against Human and Sex Trafficking and 
Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland 
Security, and Investigations, I am painfully familiar with the 
pervasiveness of sex trafficking in my own state of Texas--which has 
become a hot bed of human trafficking.
  Among law enforcement and human trafficking authorities, Houston is 
known as the hub of human trafficking.
  The highest number of calls to the National Human Trafficking Hotline 
in Texas comes from Houston, and a study conducted by the University of 
Texas stated that there are more than 300,000 victims of human 
trafficking in Texas, including almost 79,000 minors.
  In the few minutes I have left, I would like to share the story of a 
young woman named Kathy, who moved to Houston in 1994 with her family.
  Kathy was raised to be strong and independent; she was very involved 
in her church, community, and ROTC.
  She graduated from high school, with hopes of pursuing a career in 
journalism.
  Yet, Kathy became a victim of sex trafficking.
  Like most girls, she wanted to be loved.
  She met a charming young man who treated her like she had never been 
treated before.
  After a fairytale year, her Prince Charming proposed something Kathy 
felt she could not refuse--a promising job with his company, an 
administrative position that would triple her income and provide 
financial security for her future, which seemed like a dream come true.
  The job was in Dallas and, despite her initial hesitation, she saw 
the offer as an opportunity to provide for her family.
  But, shortly after she arrived in Dallas, Kathy found herself in the 
dark world of sex trafficking and prostitution--a life she never 
imagined.
  Graphic images were taken of her and placed on the Internet against 
her will.
  She was forced to perform sexual favors multiple times, every day, 
throughout Dallas and surrounding areas.
  Escape was not easy.
  She was cut off from her family.
  Her boyfriend, turned pimp, limited her phone calls to johns, and did 
not allow her to have money.
  But, somehow she found an opportunity to get away and she never 
looked back.
  After many years of living in silence, Kathy decided to journal her 
experience.
  That journal became a book, which became a stage play.
  Kathy found her voice and is now an inspirational speaker who hopes 
to use her story to encourage others to join the fight against sex 
trafficking.
  Images of Kathy's horrific past linger on the Internet.

[[Page H1293]]

  She says: ``Sites like Backpage have chosen to revictimize survivors 
and keeps us in bondage by refusing to remove images taken against our 
will.''
  Kathy hopes that one day the voices of survivors will be heard.
  Well, Kathy--know that I hear you.
  Congress hears you.
  We hear the voices of the victims, who remain in physical and mental 
bondage.
  We hear the voices of the survivors, who are struggling to rid 
themselves of reminders of their torment--survivors like Liliana who 
was lured away from her home by a man she met on the internet, held 
captive, repeatedly raped by at least five different men, and suffers 
from PTSD.
  H.R. 1865, the ``Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex 
Trafficking Act of 2017,'' together with Representative Walters's 
amendment, provides law enforcement, prosecutors, and courts at every 
level with the tools they need to hold responsible each and every bad 
actor who participates in, facilitates, contributes to, or profits from 
this modern-day form of slavery.
  The proposed legislative combination will help defend and protect 
communities across the country, guard against the further spread of sex 
trafficking, and provide survivors with a path to justice of their own.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas 
(Mr. Poe).
  Mr. POE of Texas. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman from Alabama for 
the time and the work on this bill.
  Mr. Chair, I also want to thank Mrs. Wagner from Missouri for 
sponsoring this bill, along with the help of our friends on the other 
side.
  You notice, Mr. Chair, that everybody who is in line, mostly, who are 
here to speak are women, and I want to congratulate the women in 
Congress, because they have taken the lead for making sure that we stop 
this scourge of human sex trafficking.
  Mr. Chair, I also want to thank the different groups, victims groups, 
throughout the country who have continued to give us input on what we 
can do to make laws better. I call those groups the victims posse, 
because they are here all the time rounding us up, talking to us about 
what they want and think is necessary to make life better for victims.
  Mr. Chair, according to most, Alexa was a normal and well-adjusted 
15-year-old girl, teenager, but like many young people, she struggled 
with insecurity and loneliness. So when a handsome and sympathetic man 
reached out to her on social media, she was immediately taken in by his 
kind and comforting words.
  Most Americans don't realize that the evils of human trafficking are 
all around us. Traffickers lurk on the phones, on computers, and on the 
internet, constantly searching for vulnerable victims to lure into 
their traps.
  After months of manipulation, Alexa agreed to meet her new online 
friend. As soon as she got into his car, she realized that this person 
was a different person than she believed him to be. He chained her and 
forced her to have sex for money, and he committed this evil numerous 
times.
  Technology has changed our world in countless positive ways, but it 
has also given human sex traffickers a direct avenue to our children 
and their lives. We, as a society, must work harder to capture these 
criminals and shut down their online schemes. Only then can we protect 
others from Alexa's fate.
  This is our job. This is our duty. We must stop the trafficking 
network. Not in our town, not in our city, and not in our State.
  And that is just the way it is.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from 
California (Mr. Costa).
  Mr. COSTA. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson 
Lee) for her leadership on this important issue.
  Mr. Chair, as the co-chair of the Victims' Rights Caucus with my 
colleague Congressman Ted Poe, I am a proud cosponsor of this important 
legislation for victims in America who have suffered from these crimes.
  A free and open internet, we all believe, is essential to economic 
growth, entrepreneurship, and enterprise in the 21st century, and 
America leads the way. This new technology age has reshaped our lives 
and allowed for greater access to learning, greater ability to shape 
our own futures as Americans, and with economic benefits we could not 
have imagined 15 years ago.
  Sadly, there are some people who look at these freedoms and the 
openness of the internet and see ways to exploit, abuse, and prey on 
innocent children and teenagers in the name of profit. It is 
outrageous, and it is a crime. I am speaking of the scourge of sex 
trafficking, which has impacted the lives of too many young people in 
the San Joaquin Valley that I represent and throughout America.
  Today, here in Congress, we look squarely at traffickers, pimps, and 
victimizers and say we must do a better job in protecting our citizens. 
As a result of this legislation, our laws will no longer be manipulated 
and used as a cover for their abuse. No longer will these people be 
able to hide behind the shield that the internet provides you when 
knowingly contributing to this horrible crime.
  The Fresno Bee, a local daily newspaper in the San Joaquin Valley, 
recently ran a 6-week-long series about human trafficking in the 
Valley. The paper reported that nearly every 16-year-old girl in Fresno 
has been approached at one time or another by sex traffickers. Imagine 
that: nearly every 16-year-old girl in our county.
  Police have seen sex trafficking victims from every high school in 
Fresno County and most of the junior high schools. It is horrible. This 
is a tragedy, and it cannot and should not be allowed to continue.
  Today, we say it is time to make important changes. This legislation 
does that. It will help protect our children and provide them the 
ability to confront their abusers.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Aderholt). The time of the gentleman has 
expired.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentleman from California.
  Mr. COSTA. Mr. Chair, as I had said, it is time to make these 
important changes, and this bipartisan legislation does that. It 
protects our children, providing them the ability to confront their 
abusers, including those who knowingly promote and advertise these 
crimes.
  Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman, and I am thankful for the 
bipartisan leadership in this effort.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, I yield 6 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Missouri (Mrs. Wagner), my friend and colleague.
  Mr. Chair, let me just say thank you to her for her tireless work on 
this effort.
  Mrs. WAGNER. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman from Alabama, my 
friend, Mrs. Roby, for her fearless leadership and support on this 
issue.
  Today we bring, Mr. Chair, H.R. 1865, the Allow States and Victims to 
Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act, or FOSTA, to the floor, finally.
  Mr. Chair, I want to thank my partners on the other side of the 
aisle, my dear friends, Congresswoman Joyce Beatty and Congresswoman 
Carolyn Maloney, for their tireless support on this effort.
  The sad truth is that sex trafficking is a crime as old as the Nation 
itself. Over the past few years, Congress has routinely taken 
bipartisan action to fight it, yet sex trafficking seems to continue 
unabated. This is largely because the methods of recruitment and sale 
of sex trafficking victims have evolved with technology, and U.S. laws 
have remained stagnant.
  Today, when the House votes on FOSTA, we will be sending a clear 
message: businesses that sell human beings online can no longer do so 
with impunity. Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act explicitly 
allows enforcement of Federal criminal law, but courts have mistakenly 
found that it does not allow robust enforcement of State criminal law.
  Last summer, 50 State attorneys general called on Congress to untie 
their hands to allow them to bring justice to the websites that sell 
our children and the victims. Empowering our State and local 
prosecutors is in the best interests of the American people. Federal 
prosecution is discretionary, and the vast majority of crimes are 
prosecuted at the State and local level.
  Most websites engaging in the online sex trade are first identified 
at the local level and should be quickly addressed before they ever 
reach the size of Backpage.com. Without proper State and local 
enforcement, there is no real

[[Page H1294]]

criminal deterrent against businesses looking to enter the sex trade. 
Today, we will change that.
  FOSTA will allow prosecutors across the country to protect their 
communities without fear of section 230 preemption. FOSTA will produce 
more prosecutions of bad actor websites, more convictions, and put more 
predators behind bars. It will provide a meaningful criminal deterrent 
so that fewer businesses will ever enter the sex trade and fewer 
victims will ever be sold and raped.
  Clarification of section 230 is desperately needed. In August 2017, 
the Sacramento Superior Court dismissed charges brought against 
Backpage by the California attorney general, saying: ``If and until 
Congress sees fit to amend the immunity law, the broad reach of section 
230 of the Communications Decency Act even applies to those alleged to 
support the exploitation of others by human trafficking.''
  Today, Mr. Chair, Congress sees fit to amend the immunity law to hold 
accountable websites that support exploitation. FOSTA also creates a 
new crime targeting websites that are intentionally promoting 
prostitution, and it encourages States to use or adopt similar laws.
  Unfortunately, sex trafficking ads are written to evade law 
enforcement. Looking at these ads, you usually can't tell that force, 
fraud, and coercion were used against the victim or that the person 
depicted in the ad is a minor.

                              {time}  1430

  Because indications of knowledge of sex trafficking are typically 
hidden, it is nearly impossible for prosecutors to demonstrate beyond a 
reasonable doubt that the website operators knew that the ads involved 
sex trafficking. This is why prosecutors tell me that they would 
oftentimes prefer to use prostitution laws instead of sex trafficking 
laws when charging these websites.
  Sex trafficking laws are written to target pimps, johns, and 
businesses, but are not always the best tool against the online sex 
trade. FOSTA gives prosecutors the freedom to use both State sex 
trafficking laws and the State prostitution laws, and lets prosecutors 
decide how best to do their jobs.
  Importantly, prosecutors will be able to seek a higher penalty for 
websites that promote prostitution and recklessly contribute to sex 
trafficking. Online sex trafficking is flourishing in America because 
there are no serious legal consequences for the websites that profit 
from the exploitation of our most vulnerable.
  FOSTA, combined with the SESTA Walters amendment that adds back in 
victim-centered provisions from my original language, will finally 
create these serious legal consequences.
  Today we are voting to keep our commitment to trafficking survivors, 
both by empowering them to hold accountable the websites that stole 
them and by arming prosecutors with the tools they need to ensure that 
the most vulnerable members of our society are never sold online in the 
first place.
  I trust that my colleagues will join me in this vote to fundamentally 
transform the fight against online sex trafficking in America.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Ohio (Mrs. Beatty), a Democratic cosponsor of this legislation. I thank 
her very much for her perseverance and determination.
  Mrs. BEATTY. Mr. Chair, I would like to thank Congresswoman Jackson 
Lee not only for yielding me time, but for all her scholarship and all 
of her commitment to making a difference against sex trafficking.
  Mr. Chair, today is a proud day for me. I am proud to stand here on 
this House floor to urge the support and passage of the Allow States 
and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act, known as FOSTA, as 
well as the Walters amendment.
  Human trafficking and sex trafficking is happening in all areas: big 
cities, little cities, rural and suburban areas, Democratic districts, 
Republican districts. It happens in every congressional district in 
America, regardless of whether that district is red or blue.
  Trafficking, Mr. Chair, is a nonpartisan issue, and that requires 
bipartisan solutions. And if Congressman Poe were still here, I would 
add, ``And that is just the way it is.''
  I am so honored to be joined today with so many colleagues. I also 
want to thank Congresswoman Roby for her leadership in managing the 
time. What an honor it is for me to join the leadership of 
Congresswoman Ann Wagner, not only the sponsor of this bill, but a 
friend, a colleague, someone who is my classmate. And early on, she 
started talking about human trafficking, and we shared our mutual 
interest; and we have been, so to say, joined at the hip ever since. 
And I could not thank her enough for all of her leadership.
  Mr. Chair, it tells you that we must work together. Congresswoman 
Wagner has done that with this legislation and more. So I am very 
honored to be the lead Democrat. You have heard what the Fighting 
Online Sex Trafficking Act will do, so I won't go in great details with 
that again. But I will tell you, it will address a critical problem.
  Our laws have not kept pace with how technology has been used to 
exploit the innocent. The internet has changed how humans are 
trafficked. It has taken something that was once done in the streets 
and made it easier and more anonymous. Trafficking online is a well-
documented problem, yet we have seen a few websites turn a blind eye, 
even as they profit on the buying and the selling of children, women, 
and men.
  FOSTA will help solve this in many ways, as you have heard. On this 
last point, I would like to say FOSTA is targeted in a way that will 
not only affect websites engaged in the online trafficking trade; it 
will recognize some of the concerns that some of the tech communities 
initially raised. But I think that the process that FOSTA has gone 
through in the Judiciary Committee and now with the Walters amendment 
shows how the legislative process can be used.
  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has expired.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman from Ohio.
  Mrs. BEATTY. It shows how the legislative process can be used to 
result in a better product. The bill now has the support not only of 
the trafficking victims' advocates, but also of law enforcement and 
many of the internet and tech companies.
  So, again, I thank the hard work of Congresswoman Wagner. I want to 
say that we won't solve the problem of human trafficking overnight, but 
if we get this bill signed into law, we will make it harder for 
traffickers to exploit the innocent and we will keep countless 
children, women, and men out of the cycle of abuse.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from New 
Jersey (Mr. Smith).
  Mr. SMITH of New Jersey. Mr. Chair, the internet was never meant to 
be a zone of impunity for traffickers and their accomplices, including 
classified ad websites, that turn a blind eye to or actively facilitate 
to profit from the sex trafficking of children. Yet we are seeing the 
internet used as a virtual slave market.
  Today, because of Ann Wagner's tenacity, her courage, her legislative 
skill and compassion, and this bipartisan effort that, again, comes to 
the floor to make a major change in law, we begin taking back the 
internet from traffickers by passing H.R. 1865. This legislation will 
also allow those who have been hurt to sue. It empowers women, 
especially women, to take their cases into court and to get remedies 
there as well.

  Today we say no to the status quo that allows our children to be 
bought, abused, and sold again with impunity online. Today we say no to 
courts slamming the door on trafficking victims who want to sue website 
owners complicit in sexual abuse and cruelty.
  Mr. Chair, the statistics of the National Center for Missing and 
Exploited Children show that backpage.com is the subject of the 
majority of the child trafficking tips that are received in the United 
States. In documents obtained by subpoena that backpage.com originally 
refused to share--and I see that Mrs. Maloney will be speaking in a 
moment; she and I worked very hard on that as well--Congress has found 
that backpage.com was removing telltale words and signs of likely human 
trafficking from advertisements on its

[[Page H1295]]

website but still posting the advertisements and making money. They 
made it harder to detect.
  Backpage.com actively prevented U.S. law enforcement from detecting 
children being trafficked. Backpage wasn't prosecuted. Judges across 
the country wouldn't even allow civil suits by trafficking victims who 
were sold through backpage.com, as was pointed out by Ann Wagner just a 
moment ago, all because of a law that was written before the internet 
or human trafficking was really understood: Section 230 of the 
Communications Decency Act.
  Today, Congress will change that law. God willing it passes in the 
Senate and it will be signed by the President.
  Today we can protect our children and free speech, too. H.R. 1865, as 
amended, will allow State prosecutors to prosecute, and it empowers 
trafficked women, victims, to sue the middleman who facilitated and 
profited from their slavery.
  The status quo of rampant child online sex trafficking is more than 
unacceptable; it is absolutely abhorrent to anyone who believes in 
human dignity and human rights. This is a tremendous bill. Mr. Chair, 
again, I thank Ann Wagner for her leadership.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield 2 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
New York (Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney), who joined with Representative 
Joyce Beatty from Ohio and the lead sponsor, Congresswoman Wagner, to 
be strong supporters of this legislation. She is an original cosponsor 
of the bill.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chair, I thank Congresswoman 
Lee for yielding and for her extraordinary leadership on this issue and 
in so many other areas.
  Mr. Chair, I rise in strong, strong support of H.R. 1865. It is 
transformative legislation. It is important and it will save lives. It 
is a historic legislative achievement. I thank my colleague Ann Wagner 
for her selfless, dedicated, effective leadership in bringing this bill 
to the floor. I thank my colleagues, Joyce Beatty and Sheila Jackson 
Lee, Congresswomen Roby and Walters, really everyone, and the 
leadership of this body for bringing this bill to the floor. I hope we 
should all pass it. It is important.
  This bill clarifies that internet companies that actively advertise 
the sale of trafficking victims, many of whom are children and minors, 
are not protected by the Communications Decency Act, Section 230. When 
Congress enacted it 22 years ago, it never, never intended to make the 
internet into a red-light zone and a protected area to shield sex 
traffickers and corporations from selling our young people, many of 
whom are stolen, doped, forced into sex trafficking, and then protect 
them from the appeals of their parents for some type of justification, 
some type of recognition of the harm that they have caused.
  Now, this bill, like every other sex trafficking bill, has been a 
bipartisan effort between Democrats and Republicans. It is landmark. It 
is important. And we must continue to fight this modern-day form of 
slavery wherever it exists, and this crime has absolutely exploded 
online because it is so profitable.
  You can sell a gun once. You can sell illegal dope once. But they 
sell the human body over and over again until they die.
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Burgess). The time of the gentlewoman has 
expired.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 1 minute to the 
gentlewoman.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chair, this is an important 
issue. I must tell you that we have a choice.
  This has gone to the courts, and the courts have said Congress must 
decide whether Congress wants to shield corporations, profit-makers, 
exploiters--I would say--murderers of young children online, selling 
them for sex trafficking. So if you vote against this bill, you are 
shielding them. If you vote for it, you are protecting our children.
  This bill removes obstacles for attorneys general throughout the 
country to enact State antitrafficking laws. That is why 50 attorneys 
general have supported it.
  Victims and families will be given a pathway to justice through 
private civil action that they have been denied too long. Over 50 
organizations have come out in support of H.R. 1865, and I include in 
the Record a list of those organizations.

       Shared Hope International, Arlington, VA; Rights4Girls, 
     Washington, DC; Covenant House International, New York, NY; 
     ECPAT USA, Washington, DC; World Without Exploitation, New 
     York, NY; Mary Mazzio & I AM JANE DOE Community, Boston, MA; 
     Courtney's House, Washington, DC; Legal Momentum, New York, 
     NY; Equality Now, New York, NY; National Center on Sexual 
     Exploitation (NCOSE), Washington, DC; My Life My Choice, 
     Boston, MA; Truckers Against Trafficking, Englewood, CO; 
     Sanctuary For Families, New York, NY; Trafficking in America 
     Task Force, Gainesville, FL; CSA San Diego County, El Cajon, 
     CA; Villanova Law School Institute on Commercial Sexual 
     Exploitation, Villanova, PA; National Council of Jewish Women 
     New York, New York, NY; Dawn's Place, Philadelphia, PA; 
     Child's World America, Villanova, PA; Freedom From 
     Exploitation, Inc., San Diego, CA.
       Women's Justice NOW, New York, NY; Children's Law Center of 
     California, Sacramento, CA; Carole Landis Foundation For 
     Social Action, Haverford, PA; The Voices and Faces Project, 
     Chicago, IL; NH Traffick Free Coalition, Milford, NH; The 
     Samaritan Women, Baltimore, MD; Free to Thrive, San Diego, 
     CA; Enough Is Enough, Great Falls, VA; The Lynch Foundation 
     for Children, Ranchero Santa Fe, CA; Bags of Hope Ministries, 
     Boston, MA; Hope Ranch For Women, Wichita, KS; Wings of 
     Refuge, Iowa Falls, IA; North Star Initiative, Lititz, PA; 
     Zoe Ministries, Greenwood, DE; Abolition Ohio, Dayton, OH; 
     Arrow Child & Family Ministries, Baltimore, MD; Consumer 
     Watchdog, Washington, DC; Airline Ambassadors International, 
     Arlington, VA; Journey Out, Los Angeles, CA; The Ricky Martin 
     Foundation, San Juan, PR; Praesidium Partners, Richmond, VA; 
     Worthwhile Wear, Silverdale, PA; Amirah, Woburn, MA; Saved in 
     America, Oceanside, CA; Awaken, Reno, NV; Ala Kuola, 
     Honolulu, HI; Glory House of Miami, Miami, FL; Generate Hope, 
     San Diego, CA; Refuge for Women Las Vegas, Las Vegas, NV.


                         individual signatures

       J.S., Child sex trafficking survivor, Chattanooga, TN.
       Tom and Nacole S., Parents of a child sex trafficking 
     survivor, Chattanooga, TN.
       Kubiiki Pride, Mother of a child sex trafficking survivor, 
     Boston, MA.
       Ambassador Swanee Hunt.
       Marian Hatcher, Senior Project Manager/Human Trafficking 
     Coordinator, Cook County Sheriff's Office, Chicago, IL.
       Penny M. Venetis, Clinical Prof. of Law/Director, 
     International Human Rights Clinic, Rutgers Law School, 
     Newark, NJ.
       Michelle Madden Dempsey, Professor of Law, Villanova 
     University Charles Widger School of Law, Villanova, PA.
       Donna M. Hughes, Professor, Eleanor M and Oscar M Carlson 
     Endowed Chair, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI.
       Jody Raphael, Senior Research Fellow, DePaul University 
     College of Law, Chicago, IL.
       Audrey Rogers, Professor of Law, Elisabeth Haub School of 
     Law, New York, NY.
       Katha Pollitt, Columnist, The Nation, New York, NY.
       Sarah Robinson, Public Defender, Defender Association of 
     Philadelphia, Philadelphia, PA.
       Dayle Ann Hunt, Playwright, The Trauma Brain Project, 
     Chicago, IL.

  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Some corporations, like 
Facebook, Sheryl Sandberg, and others have stood up and said: Enough is 
enough; protect our children.
  Mr. Chair, I include in the Record the following statement from 
Sheryl Sandberg of Facebook.

       Sex trafficking--particularly of young girls and boys--is 
     one of the most heinous acts that takes place anywhere in the 
     world. Those of us in the United States must recognize that 
     these deplorable acts of buying and selling children for sex 
     don't just happen in other countries. They happen here all as 
     well--right under our noses, on our streets, and on the 
     Internet. We all have a responsibility to do our part to 
     fight this. That's why we at Facebook support efforts to pass 
     amended legislation in the House that would allow responsible 
     companies to continue fighting sex trafficking while giving 
     victims the chance to seek justice against companies that 
     knowingly facilitate such abhorrent acts.
       I care deeply about this issue and I'm so thankful to all 
     the advocates who are fighting tirelessly to make sure we put 
     a stop to trafficking while helping victims get the support 
     they need. Facebook is committed to working with them and 
     with legislators in the House and Senate as the process moves 
     forward to make sure we pass meaningful and strong 
     legislation to stop sex trafficking.

  The Acting CHAIR. The time of the gentlewoman has again expired.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield an additional 30 seconds to the 
gentlewoman.
  Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York. Mr. Chair, today, 22 years after

[[Page H1296]]

Congress passed the CDA, we have the opportunity to declare that the 
intention of the law was never to protect traffickers and companies 
that actively sell and enable them to continue this incredible, 
horrible, life-taking crime of promoting sex trafficking and selling 
our young people.
  I urge a strong ``no'' vote. Let's make it unanimous. Let's show the 
world, the courts, the families, the victims where we stand.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
Washington (Mrs. McMorris Rodgers), our fearless leader, the chairman 
of our conference.

                              {time}  1445

  Mrs. McMORRIS RODGERS. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for 
yielding me time, for her tremendous leadership; the leadership of the 
gentlewoman from Missouri; and so many more.
  Mr. Chairman, I rise today in support of the Allow States and Victims 
to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017.
  There is no question that human sex trafficking is one of the most 
significant epidemics that we face today. It often takes place in our 
own backyards, like in my district in eastern Washington. It targets 
our children, families, friends, and neighbors.
  Fortunately, there are so many organizations, and I am grateful for 
those in eastern Washington who have stepped up--the Coalition to 
Abolish Human Trafficking--working to stop these horrific and 
heartbreaking crimes.
  This bill will help fight online human trafficking through websites 
like Backpage, that serve as an illicit forum for traffickers.
  I also rise in support of the amendment by my friend Mimi Walters 
from California, which I believe is crucial to the success of this 
bill.
  By strengthening section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, we 
can restore victims' access to justice and hold accountable tech 
companies and online websites that make human trafficking easier and 
knowingly turn a blind eye.
  We know these websites have the ability to sensor content, and we see 
it in the political world every day. So why can't they work harder to 
sensor and remove posts related to sex trafficking and enslavement of 
other human beings?
  This isn't hard. It is common sense to hold websites accountable for 
the crimes committed on their sites.
  We all must work together to put an end to human sex trafficking, 
which is why I urge my colleagues to support the Walters amendment and 
the underlying bill.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from 
California (Ms. Lofgren), a member of the Judiciary Committee, a 
distinguished Member, who is the ranking member of the Subcommittee on 
Immigration and Border Security and knows about violations of human 
beings.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, section 230 of the Communications Decency 
Act has been an important element of the law. It has allowed the 
internet to flourish. We support that.
  But we never intended section 230 to protect people who are 
trafficking in human beings, who are abusing children, who are 
prostituting children. Really, modern slavery. It is an outrage.
  And when we saw the court cases about Backpage where they basically 
used the CDA as a shield for action that was absolutely criminal, in my 
judgment, those guys belong in prison, as far as I am concerned. The 
good news is that the bill drafted by Representative Wagner actually 
fixes this problem.
  We just got a letter from the U.S. Department of Justice. I just 
received it. This is what they say: ``Every day, trafficking victims in 
America appear in online advertisements that are used to sell them for 
sex. The Department works diligently to hold traffickers accountable 
for their crimes but faces serious challenges.''
  It goes on to say that the ``high evidentiary standard needed'' is a 
problem; but it also says that that bill, as drafted and reported from 
the Judiciary Committee, addresses the issues that are preventing 
prosecution, and it ``would take meaningful steps to end the industry 
of advertising trafficking victims for commercial sex.''
  I would just like to say thanks to the authors of the bill, as well 
as the Judiciary Committee, on which I serve. We worked together on a 
bipartisan basis to make adjustments. We had hearings so that we could 
have this bill that the Department of Justice says will allow them to 
successfully go after these guys who are trafficking these children and 
other victims.
  A word of caution, however, and I will talk about this later when the 
amendment comes up, on the Walters amendment.
  The Justice Department says in this letter that they believe ``any 
revision . . . to define `participation in a venture' is unnecessary,'' 
and, in fact, that the ``new language would impact prosecutions by 
effectively creating additional elements.'' In fact, they say the 
amendment will make it harder to prosecute.
  We get told in law school that bad cases make bad law. One of the 
ways to avoid that is to have the committee process work through it. 
That did not happen in the case of the amendment that will be offered 
later.
  So based on the Justice Department's admonition, I am grateful to 
their celebration of the underlying bill, and I am mindful of their 
warning that the amendment could undo all of the good work that we have 
done on a bipartisan basis.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chairman, I yield such time as he may consume to the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte), chairman of the Judiciary 
Committee.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, I rise in strong support of H.R. 1865, 
the Allow States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 
2017, and urge my colleagues to do the same.
  This legislation will finally make a meaningful difference in 
combating online sex trafficking. For too long, bad actor websites have 
operated with impunity in selling young women and girls forced into the 
commercial sale of sex. They have, beyond any shadow of a doubt, 
profited off the misery of others. They have convinced courts to 
misapply the Communications Decency Act, a Federal law that was 
originally intended to encourage websites to police content and rid 
platforms of illegal content. They have misused the Communications 
Decency Act as a shield to avoid criminal liability in State courts.
  Given the number of local websites that are deliberately selling 
women and children for sex, we must now take steps to allow Federal, 
State, and local prosecutors to hold these websites accountable and 
dismantle these illicit, heinous online markets.

  H.R. 1865 will ensure vigorous criminal enforcement against bad actor 
websites by creating a new Federal law to prosecute these sites and 
explicitly permitting States the ability to enforce comparable laws.
  While the Federal code does not criminalize the knowing advertisement 
of sex trafficking, this statute is, unfortunately, of limited utility. 
Nearly all websites responsible for rampant sex trafficking 
advertisements host ads that rarely, if ever, state that the victim 
being sold is either underage or subject to force, fraud, or coercion.
  Therefore, this bill takes measures to target websites that are 
deliberately promoting and facilitating prostitution.
  Additionally, H.R. 1865 provides for an aggravated violation that 
applies to websites that promote prostitution in reckless disregard of 
the fact that sex trafficking is occurring on their platform.
  I want to highlight, Mr. Chairman, an amendment that will be offered 
to this legislation. Though I applaud my colleague's dedication to this 
issue and fully appreciate the suffering of victims, I have concerns 
about this amendment which states that the provisions of the bill apply 
regardless of whether the conduct alleged occurred or is alleged to 
have occurred before, on, or after such date of enactment.
  Had regular order been followed, Mr. Chairman, the Judiciary 
Committee would certainly have fixed this issue, which I believe could 
subject this legislation to a constitutional challenge under the ex 
post facto clause, a concern shared by the Justice Department.
  I hope we have an opportunity to fix this problem as we move forward 
with the bill, and I include in the Record a

[[Page H1297]]

letter from the Department of Justice highlighting these constitutional 
concerns.

                                    Office of Legislative Affairs,


                                   U.S. Department of Justice,

                                Washington, DC, February 27, 2018.
     Hon. Robert W. Goodlatte,
     Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
     House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Mr. Chairman: This letter presents the views of the 
     Department of Justice (Department) on H.R. 1865, the ``Allow 
     States and Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 
     2017.'' The Department supports H.R. 1865. We applaud House 
     and Senate legislative efforts to address the use of websites 
     to facilitate sex trafficking and to protect and restore 
     victims who were sold for sex online. The Department 
     appreciates this opportunity to provide technical assistance 
     to ensure that these goals are fully met through narrowly 
     tailored legislation. The Department also notes that a 
     provision in the bill raises a serious constitutional 
     concern.
       Every day, trafficking victims in America appear in online 
     advertisements that are used to sell them for sex. The 
     Department works diligently to hold the traffickers 
     accountable for their crimes but faces serious challenges. 
     This is due in part to the high evidentiary standard needed 
     to bring federal criminal charges for advertising sex 
     trafficking, but also because the Communications Decency Act 
     (CDA), codified at 47 U.S.C. Sec. 230, bars our state and 
     local partners from bringing any criminal action that is 
     inconsistent with that section. H.R. 1865 addresses both 
     issues and would take meaningful steps to end the industry of 
     advertising trafficking victims for commercial sex.


                          TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

       Section 3(a) of the bill creates 18 U.S.C. Sec. 2421A, a 
     new federal offense that prohibits the use or operation of 
     websites (and other means or facilities of interstate 
     commerce) with the intent to promote or facilitate 
     prostitution. The bill also provides for an aggravated felony 
     if the defendant recklessly disregards that the crime 
     contributed to sex trafficking as prohibited by 18 U.S.C. 
     Sec. 1591(a). Section 2421A would stand as a strong 
     complement to existing federal laws.
       However, the Department notes that Section 2421A as 
     originally drafted is broader than necessary because it would 
     extend to situations where there is a minimal federal 
     interest, such as to instances in which an individual person 
     uses a cell phone to manage local commercial sex transactions 
     involving consenting adults. Therefore, the Department would 
     support amending the language of Section 2421A so that 
     Congress can clarify its intent to target traffickers using 
     or operating interactive computer services, as follows (with 
     a corresponding change to 2421A(b)): ``Whoever, using a 
     facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce or in or 
     affecting interstate or foreign commerce, owns, manages, or 
     operates an interactive computer service, as defined in 
     Section 230(f) of Title 47, United States Code, or conspires 
     or attempts to do so, with the intent to promote or 
     facilitate prostitution shall be fined under this title, 
     imprisoned for not more than 15 years, or both.''
       The Department believes that any revision to 18 U.S.C. 
     Sec. 1591 to define ``participation in a venture'' is 
     unnecessary. Section 1591 already sets an appropriately high 
     burden of proof, particularly in cases involving advertising. 
     Under current law, prosecutors must prove that the defendant 
     knowingly benefitted from participation in a sex trafficking 
     venture, knew that the advertisement related to commercial 
     sex, and knew that the advertisement involved a minor or the 
     use of force, fraud, or coercion. See Backpage.com, LLC v. 
     Lynch, D.D.C., Civil Action No. 15-2155, Docket 16 (Oct. 24, 
     2016). While well intentioned, this new language would impact 
     prosecutions by effectively creating additional elements that 
     prosecutors must prove at trial. In the context of the bill, 
     which also permits States to bring actions for conduct 
     equivalent to Section 1591, we are also mindful that this 
     language could have unintended consequences as applied by the 
     States.
       Section 4 of H.R. 1865 also sets forth critical revisions 
     to the CDA to permit state prosecutors to bring criminal 
     actions related to sex trafficking and the use of the 
     internet with the intent to promote or facilitate 
     prostitution. The Department believes that the existence of 
     this exception to the CDA will alter the landscape of the 
     industry involved in advertising prostitution.


                         CONSTITUTIONAL CONCERN

       We note that Section 4 of H.R. 1865 states that the changes 
     to the CDA ``shall apply regardless of whether the conduct 
     alleged occurred [sic], or is alleged to have occurred, 
     before, on, or after such date of enactment.'' This raises a 
     serious constitutional concern. Insofar as this bill would 
     ``impose[] a punishment for an act which was not punishable 
     at the time it was committed'' or ``impose[] additional 
     punishment to that then prescribed'' it would violate the 
     Constitution's Ex Post Facto Clause. Cummings v. Missouri, 4 
     Wall. 277, 325-326 (1867); see Beazell v. Ohio, 269 U.S. 167, 
     169-170 (1925); U.S. Const. art I, Sec. 9, cl. 3. The 
     Department objects to this provision because it is 
     unconstitutional. We would welcome the opportunity to work 
     with Congress to address this serious constitutional concern.
       Thank you for the opportunity to present our views in 
     support of this legislation. We hope this information is 
     helpful, and we look forward to continuing to work with 
     Congress on this important legislation. Please do not 
     hesitate to contact this office if we may provide additional 
     assistance regarding this or any other matter. The Office of 
     Management and Budget has advised us that from the 
     perspective of the Administration's program, there is no 
     objection to submission of this letter.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Stephen E. Boyd,
                                       Assistant Attorney General.

  Mr. GOODLATTE. Nevertheless, Mr. Chairman, I will support this bill 
since its strong reforms will allow State and local prosecutors to 
vigorously enforce the law against some of the worst criminals in 
society today.
  This bill will allow law enforcement to effectively dismantle this 
lucrative, expansive, immoral, reprehensible market. Our children and 
vulnerable women are not commodities to be sold. This legislation 
emphatically affirms that fact. It will truly make a difference.
  I would like to commend my colleague Mrs. Wagner from Missouri and 
her dedicated staff for their work on this legislation and for their 
continued dedication to combatting sex trafficking and supporting 
victims.
  Mr. Chairman, I encourage my colleagues to support this important 
legislation.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from 
Arkansas (Mr. Crawford).
  Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Chairman, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding time 
to me.
  Mr. Chairman, this bill is one of several we passed in the House that 
aims to combat the horrific and disgusting act of sex trafficking of 
minors on our borders.
  Today, I want to share two stories of Ashton Talley and Arissa 
Farmer, both from my district, the First District of Arkansas, who were 
taken for the purpose of being trafficked, but, thankfully, were 
rescued before being lost in this abominable trade.
  These young women were sought online by men preying on thousands of 
underage minors. Their stories, sadly, mirror one another and those of 
countless other minors across America.
  Both were courted online by older men and believed they were engaging 
in harmless friendships. In both instances, these men traveled to my 
district from other States to take Ashton and Arissa to Washington 
State and Nebraska, respectively, for their horrific purposes.
  It is believed that, for one of the victims, her eventual destination 
was to be the Super Bowl in Minneapolis, which reportedly draws an 
increase in trafficking activity for big events like that. In the other 
case, the victim was one of over 8,000 minors sought online by her 
predator.
  Mr. Chairman, these girls are not unlike our own children. They are 
kids that we all see in our schools, our churches, and our 
neighborhoods. We must take the necessary steps like H.R. 1865 to 
protect America's children from these repugnant individuals.
  This bill will not be the end-all for stamping out this unfortunate 
segment of society. We must all recognize this despicable act for what 
it is and work together to protect our youth by enacting responsible 
policy and becoming educated in the tactics used by predators to groom 
and lure our children.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this bill, and I remain 
committed to fighting the ongoing practice of sex trafficking.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time 
and offer a closing to this important legislation.
  Mr. Chairman, as indicated, I had offered an amendment that would 
have allowed victims of sex trafficking to file civil action in State 
courts under the same conditions set forth in the underlying bill for 
Federal/civil actions.
  I believe, however, that we have laid a stupendous foundation for 
innocent victims and that we will have an opportunity to work with all 
of our friends who fought so hard for this legislation.
  So again, I want to take the opportunity to thank Congresswoman 
Wagner and her cosponsors, and as well Congresswoman Maloney and 
Congresswoman Beatty, and the work that we have done in the Judiciary 
Committee through a period of coming together, I believe, is extremely 
constructive.
  It is so constructive that we have any number of support letters. I 
include in

[[Page H1298]]

the Record a statement by John F. Clark, President and CEO of the 
National Center for Missing & Exploited Children.

 Statement By John F. Clark, President & and CEO, National Center for 
                     Missing and Exploited Children


 Regarding House Action on Legislation to Provide Justice to Child Sex 
                 Trafficking Victims--February 23, 2018

       The National Center for Missing & Exploited Children is 
     pleased that the House of Representatives is scheduled to 
     consider Representative Ann Wagner's Allow States and Victims 
     to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act (H.R. 1865) next week. We 
     strongly urge all Members to support the crucial amendment 
     offered by Representative Mimi Walters, which makes long 
     needed updates to the Communications Decency Act (CDA) to 
     ensure that children trafficked for sex online can have their 
     day in court against online traffickers and to clarify that 
     there is no legal protection for anyone who participates in 
     the sex trafficking of children.
       We especially thank Senators Rob Portman and Richard 
     Blumenthal for their powerful leadership in authoring the 
     Stop Enabling Sex Traffickers Act (S. 1693), which is the 
     basis for Representative Walters' amendment, and for their 
     ongoing support of the child survivors, their families, and 
     the coalition of advocacy organizations who serve these 
     survivors.
       We look forward to continuing to work with Members of 
     Congress to bring this legislation to a vote on the House 
     Floor and through the Senate so that it can get to the 
     President's desk to be signed into law.

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I include in the Record a letter from 
Enough is Enough.

       For Immediate Release: February 26, 2018

  Enough Is Enough Calls on the U.S. House of Representatives To Pass 
    Critical Legislation To Hold Websites Accountable for Knowingly 
                      Facilitating Sex Trafficking


   Statement by Donna Rice Hughes, President & CEO, Enough Is Enough

       Great Falls, VA.--H.R. 1865, the Fight Online Sex 
     Trafficking Act of 2017 (FOSTA), originally introduced by 
     Representative Ann Wagner, is scheduled for an historic floor 
     vote on Tuesday. The need for legislation to clarify Section 
     230 of the Communication's Decency Act (CDA) is necessary 
     given the 1st Circuit ruling in Doe v Backpage which held 
     that even if Backpage had participated in the crime of sex 
     trafficking, Section 230 shielded the company from the claims 
     filed by child victims.
       ``The urgency to amend Section 230 of the Communications 
     Decency Act is long overdue,'' said EIE President Donna Rice 
     Hughes. ``Section 230, originally known as the Good Samaritan 
     Defense, was intended to protect children from the online 
     exploitation. Unfortunately, it has been anything but a Good 
     Samaritan immunity for responsible Internet service and 
     content providers, and instead has been misused by third 
     party websites like backpage.com as a Trojan horse to 
     knowingly facilitate sex and trafficking with women in 
     children,'' said Ms. Hughes. ``There must be accountability 
     in the form of state and local criminal and civil liability 
     for such sites which have been referred to by prosecutors as 
     an `online brothel.' Its time to put the dignity of women and 
     children over corporate profit,'' said Hughes.
       For years, EIE has encouraged Congress to amend Section 230 
     due to a series of devastating rulings in multiple court 
     cases over the years which have misinterpreted Section 230 of 
     the Communications Decency Act by granting anything goes 
     immunity to websites whose advertising business model 
     knowingly facilitates sex trafficking and exploitation.
       ``By passing FOSTA along with the crucial amendment offered 
     by Representative Mimi Walters which mirrors S. 1693 ``Stop 
     Enabling Sex Trafficking Act 2017'' (SESTA), each member of 
     the House has the opportunity to send an `enough is enough' 
     clarion message to sites who exploit and traffic vulnerable 
     children and women and to the federal courts who have failed 
     to properly interpret Congress's original intent for #230 An 
     overwhelming `yes' vote by the House will say to child 
     victims, `we hear you, we see you and we are standing with 
     you by providing the necessary legislative remedy to seek 
     justice,'' continued Hughes, who applauded the resolution 
     last week set forth unanimously by the Kentucky House of 
     Representatives, which requested and petitioned the U.S. 
     Congress to amend sections of the Community Decency Act (CDA 
     230) to ``permit the prosecution of interactive computer 
     service providers.''
       In 2016, during his candidacy, Donald Trump signed EIE's 
     Children's Internet Safety Presidential Pledge in which he 
     promised to ``aggressively enforce existing federal laws to 
     prevent the sexual exploitation of children online, including 
     the obscenity, child pornography, sexual predation & sex 
     trafficking laws.'' Ms. Hughes added, ``We strongly urge the 
     House to pass the FOSTA-SESTA compromise package and move it 
     to the Senate, offering hope to and justice for those who 
     have suffered from this unconscionable act of human 
     exploitation.'' SESTA, originally introduced by Senators 
     Portman and Blumenthal currently has 67 bipartisan Senate co-
     sponsors and is endorsed by the Internet Association (IA), as 
     is H.R. 1865.
       In 2013, Enough Is Enough voiced strong support of the 
     effort of The National Association of Attorneys General (49 
     Attorneys General) calling on Congress to support a simple 
     two word amendment that would enable state prosecutors to 
     help fight prostitution and child sex trafficking. 
     Unfortunately, Congress failed to act, resulting in more 
     years of untold trauma and exploitation for trafficking 
     victims and huge profits for websites and interactive service 
     providers.

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I also include in the Record a letter 
from World Without Exploitation with many, many signatures.

                         For Immediate Release

 National Anti-Trafficking Coalition Urges Congress to Pass FOSTA With 
   Section 230 Provision to Curb Online Sex Trafficking--As Internet 
Demand Explodes, World Without Exploitation Calls on National Lawmakers 
to Support Survivors and Stem the Tide of Human Trafficking by Holding 
                          Websites Accountable

       New York, NY--February 26, 2018--World Without Exploitation 
     (WorldWE), the national coalition to end human trafficking 
     and exploitation, today urges members of Congress to pass 
     legislation that would clarify Section 230 of the 
     Communications Decency Act and allow state law enforcement 
     and survivors to seek justice against websites that knowingly 
     engage in facilitating human trafficking. The bill will help 
     disrupt sex trafficking in the United States, much of which 
     has shifted from the streets to the Internet.
       The Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017 (FOSTA), H.R. 
     1865, was introduced by Rep. Ann Wagner (R-MO) and now 
     includes a crucial amendment by Rep. Mimi Walters (R-CA) that 
     seeks to close a legal loophole in Section 230 of the 
     Communications Decency Act that allows websites that host 
     online sex ads to operate with impunity. The Walters 
     amendment echoes language from the Stop Enabling Sex 
     Traffickers Act of 2017 (SESTA), S. 1693 sponsored in the 
     Senate by Rob Portman (R-OH) and Richard Blumenthal (D-CT).
       ``Every day, thousands of children and adults are being 
     illegally bought and sold online, and the websites that 
     facilitate these transactions have been able to hide behind 
     legislation that was never designed to shelter this kind of 
     activity,'' said Lauren Hersh, national director of WorldWE. 
     ``WorldWE and our members are incredibly grateful to Reps. 
     Wagner and Walters and Sens. Portman and Blumenthal, among 
     many others, for listening to the voices of survivors and 
     driving meaningful change with so much bipartisan support. 
     The urgency we are seeing to stop human trafficking at the 
     highest levels of our government is truly inspiring.''
       With the growth of the Internet, human trafficking that 
     once happened mainly on street corners has largely shifted 
     online. According to the National Center for Missing & 
     Exploited Children, 73 percent of the 10,000 child sex 
     trafficking reports it receives from the public each year 
     involve ads on the website Backpage.com. The anonymity and 
     ease with which victims can be bought and. sold on the 
     Internet has created a multibillion-dollar industry, and a 
     tremendous surge in exploitation across the United States.
       ``The illegal sex trade is no less odious simply because it 
     is operating on the Web,'' said Anne K. Ream, founding co-
     chair of WorldWE. ``Wherever it happens, whenever it happens, 
     human trafficking is an industry in which profits are built 
     on human pain. We need public policies that are responsive to 
     the current face of trafficking, which is why passage of 
     FOSTA with the Walters amendment is so critical.''
       ``We urge the House to pass FOSTA with the Walters 
     amendment and send the bill to the Senate for adoption,'' 
     said Nikki Bell, founder and director of Living in Freedom 
     Together (LIFT), a survivor-led organization. ``We are hoping 
     after today, we will be one step closer to bringing justice 
     to survivors and disrupting the profitable model of online 
     trafficking in our country.''
       To learn more about WorldWE, hear survivor stories, donate, 
     and join our movement to create a world without exploitation, 
     please visit http://www.worldwithoutexploitation.org./


 About World Without Exploitation

       World Without Exploitation (WorldWE) is a national 
     coalition of more than 100 organizations and individuals 
     committed to human rights, civil rights, and gender justice. 
     WordWE's mission is to create a world where no person is 
     bought, sold or exploited. The coalition aims to create a 
     culture where those who have been trafficked or sexually 
     exploited are treated as victims of a crime, not criminals 
     themselves, while those who purchase, sell or exploit another 
     human being are punished.

  Ms. JACKSON LEE. What was it like before this legislation? Simply, 
J.S., who is documented in the film ``Jane Doe,'' will tell you. A 
bright young lady, 15 years old, ran on the track team here in this 
area and, for her own enthusiasm, went to Seattle, Washington.
  When she went to Seattle, Washington, it would have been nice if a 
kind soul had found her, but that was not the case.

[[Page H1299]]

  Within 15 days, she met a man twice her age, who seduced her with 
gifts and convinced her to stay with him. Once she trusted the 32-year-
old, he quickly turned on her and raped her, and he would post explicit 
pictures of her in an ad on Backpage.com, and she was forced to 
continue to have sex for money.

                              {time}  1500

  One would think that there was relief. But when her family sought to 
file in court, she lost. She lost. Only through the work of Congress 
has her case been able to move forward on an appeal.
  So the work that we have done is vital to saving lives and to 
restoring lives. I am inspired and energized by the countless 
survivors, many of whom I have seen today and many of whom I have 
joined with last Monday in my district.
  As a leader in the fight against human and sex trafficking and 
ranking member of the Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism, Homeland 
Security, and Investigations, I am painfully familiar with the 
pervasiveness of sex trafficking in my own State of Texas, which has 
become a hotbed of human trafficking in the city of Houston.
  Among law enforcement and human trafficking authorities, Houston is 
known as a hub of human trafficking, not because of the lack of concern 
and energy in my law enforcement and social service community. It is 
just an epicenter because of the ability for people to come because of 
the warm weather, for children who have aged out of foster care, and 
for others who are victims of human trafficking.
  The highest number of calls to the National Human Trafficking Hotline 
in Texas comes from Houston, and a study conducted by the University of 
Texas stated that there are more than 300,000 victims of human 
trafficking in Texas, including almost 79,000 minors.
  The story of Kathy, right here in Houston, in the few minutes I have 
left, I would like to share the story of a young woman named Kathy who 
moved to Houston in 1994 with her family. Kathy was raised to be strong 
and independent. She was very involved in a church community and ROTC. 
So in the few minutes I have remaining, I will share the story of 
Kathy.
  She graduated from high school with hopes of pursuing a career in 
journalism, but she became a victim of sex trafficking. Like most 
girls, she wanted to be loved. She met a charming young man who treated 
her like she had never been treated before.
  After a fairytale year, her Prince Charming proposed something Kathy 
felt she could not refuse: a promising job with his company, an 
administrative position that would triple her income and provide 
financial security for her future. It seemed like a dream come true.
  The job was in Dallas. Despite her initial hesitation, she saw the 
offer as an opportunity to provide for her family. But shortly after 
she arrived in Dallas, Kathy found herself in the dark world of sex 
trafficking and prostitution, a life she never knew she would be 
involved in.
  Graphic images were taken of her and placed on the internet against 
her will. She was forced to perform sexual favors multiple times every 
day throughout Dallas' surrounding areas.
  Escape was not easy. She was cut off from her family. Her boyfriend-
turned-pimp limited her phone calls to johns and did not allow her to 
have money. Somehow she found an opportunity to get away, and she never 
looked back.
  After many years of living in silence, Kathy decided to journal her 
experience. The journal became a book, which became a stage play. Kathy 
found her voice and is now an inspirational speaker who hopes to use 
her story to encourage others to join the fight.
  Images of Kathy's horrific past linger on. She said:

       Sites like Backpage have chosen to revictimize survivors 
     and keep us in bondage by refusing to remove images taken 
     against our will.

  Kathy hopes that one day the voices of survivors will be heard. Well, 
we hear Kathy today. Congress hears her. We hear the voices of the 
victims remaining in physical and mental bondage.
  So, in conclusion, let me say, as we hear the voices of the 
survivors, we realize the importance of our First Amendment and the 
ability of free expression. But we know that the torment that these 
victims are going through, the PTSD that they are suffering, really is 
a statement of importance for H.R. 1865 that allows States and victims 
to fight online sex trafficking and to work with all of those who have 
worked so hard on this bill, from our Judiciary Committee to the Senate 
Judiciary Committee to the sponsors, and to go forward building on this 
legislation with more legislation, more victims being able to work with 
us, and, finally, Mr. Chairman, to be able to stomp out and extinguish 
human trafficking, sex trafficking, and online trafficking.
  This is a powerful nation. There is no reason why we cannot do this. 
I look forward to that effort. With that, I ask for a vote of ``yes'' 
on this bill.
  I want to say that Mrs. Maloney, who sounded as if she said vote 
``no,'' really meant to say she wants a resounding ``yes'' on this 
legislation as well.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself the balance of my time.
  Mr. Chairman, I again want to thank my colleague, Ann Wagner, for all 
of her hard work on this very, very important piece of legislation.
  It is our responsibility here in Congress to provide the strongest, 
most effective tools possible to confront, punish, and, ultimately, 
prevent the horrific nightmare that is human sex trafficking. For far 
too long, we have seen a stark rise in the use of the internet to buy 
and sell trafficking victims and minors for sex.
  This sick industry has been allowed to prosper because, due to broad 
interpretation of existing law, there have been no serious legal 
consequences for websites that turn a profit by selling human beings. 
Today it is incumbent upon us to stop this horrifying injustice by 
passing H.R. 1865 to finally give prosecutors the tools they need to 
crack down on sites that promote and participate in the human sex 
trade.
  Mr. Chairman, I call on all my colleagues to support this legislation 
today and to send a clear message that we will no longer tolerate this 
evil, atrocious behavior, and we will no longer be complicit in letting 
these bad actors get away with these hateful crimes against humanity.
  Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. COSTA. Mr. Chair, I include in the Record these excerpts from a 
series of articles entitled ``Slaves of the Sex Trade'' by Rory 
Appleton from the Fresno Bee: ``Don't kid yourself. Sex slaves are all 
around us--and you may know some of them'' (November 2, 2017), ``She 
was a hospital worker. He sold her for sex before, during and after her 
shifts'' (November 2, 2017), ``Police: 'Every 16-year-old girl in 
Fresno' has been targeted by sex trade recruiters'' (November 9, 2017), 
``Once sold for sex, she now helps lead the fight against human 
trafficking'' (November 15, 2017), ``How do you rescue women forced to 
walk the streets at night? It's not easy'' (November 16, 2017), ``To 
break the cycle of children sold for sex, the legal system is trying 
something new'' (November 28, 2017), ``All of us must help beat the 
scourge of human trafficking. Here's what you can do'' (December 7, 
2017). The full series can be found at http://www.fresnobee.com/news/
special-reports/human-trafficking/.
  These seven articles demonstrate the impact of sex trafficking on our 
communities. I commend the Fresno Bee on their important reporting.

                  [From the Fresno Bee, Nov. 2, 2017]

Don't Kid Yourself. Sex Slaves Are All Around Us--and You May Know Some 
                                of Them

                           (By Rory Appleton)

       Rebecca Rodriguez-Brown still remembers the room where he 
     imprisoned her--the charming man she met and fell in love 
     with while still a teenager. She mapped it out with her hands 
     as she sat in a central Fresno office nearly 20 years later.
       ``They would have a little microwave there, and they would 
     have a little ice chest right there by the sink,'' she said. 
     ``I still remember the color of the ice chest.''
       Rodriguez-Brown isn't sure whether the room was in an 
     apartment or hotel. But she does remember that for seven 
     months she was kept in this room under guard and forced to 
     perform whatever sex act the strangers entering the room 
     asked for. The room was punishment for refusing to do the 
     same at her trafficker's home. Her captors brought her all of 
     her meals. If she defied them, she'd be beaten--sometimes 
     with her hands bound.

[[Page H1300]]

       The Bee normally does not identify the victims of sexual 
     assault, however Rodriguez-Brown agreed to be named.
       Her story is not uncommon in Fresno, or anywhere in the 
     world. It is one of cyclical abuse, habitual arrest and 
     unspeakable trauma. Women and children are bought and sold 
     every day in Fresno--online, in street corners, while at 
     school. They are raped, branded and beaten. They are taught 
     that they are the problem, not the people who force them into 
     this life--causing psychological scars that may never heal.
       It is what many refer to as ``modern-day slavery.''
       Full article is available at: http://www.fresnobee.com/
news/special-reports/human-trafficking/article182090031.html
____


                  [From the Fresno Bee, Nov. 2, 2017]

She Was a Hospital Worker. He Sold Her for Sex Before, During and After 
                               Her Shifts

                           (By Rory Appleton)

       At her lowest point, the days seemed to stretch on forever. 
     Eight hours a day as a hospital administrator, five hours--
     sometimes more--as a prostitute.
       He would wake her up at 4 a.m. to walk the streets. She 
     hated it--not that the house calls were much better. But when 
     she begged to stop, he would convince her the fault was hers. 
     Eventually, she would apologize and allow him to drop her off 
     before the sun was up.
       ``He wanted at least $300 before I went to work at the 
     hospital,'' she said.
       So she would work the streets for three hours before 
     starting an eight-hour day scheduling appointments in the 
     nephrology unit of a San Diego hospital--a job she had 
     enjoyed before she met him. He eventually forced her to have 
     sex with men during her lunch break, in addition to before 
     and after work. On the weekends, he took her to neighboring 
     cities--a common tactic to avoid law enforcement or reach a 
     new clientele.
       ``If it were up to him, I would have never slept,'' she 
     said.
       The mood-altering drug Xanax helped with the anxiety 
     stemming from the intense guilt she felt. She was ashamed to 
     talk to her friends and family--not that she could have if 
     she wanted to. He had her phone now, and he made sure she 
     never heard about her mother's attempts to contact her.
       This woman, now 34, is one of thousands who are sex-
     trafficked in California each year and one of hundreds of 
     victims now living in the central San Joaquin Valley.
       Full article available at: http://www.fresnobee.com/news/
special-reports/human-trafficking/article182089821.html
____


                  [From the Fresno Bee, Nov. 9, 2017]

  Police: `Every 16-Year-Old Girl in Fresno' Has Been Targeted by Sex 
                            Trade Recruiters

                           (By Rory Appleton)

       It was about 2 p.m. on a Tuesday when the 15-year-old girl 
     left her central Fresno hotel room. She climbed into a car 
     driven by a stranger, who would take her to another stranger 
     with whom she had agreed to have sex for money.
       If it had been a few minutes later, the girl could have 
     easily blended in with children walking home from school. She 
     was not dressed provocatively; she wore a red Fresno State 
     sweatshirt and jeans. She was not wearing excessive makeup. 
     She carried a backpack.
       Who knows how many times she had followed this pattern--
     strange men and strange cars. Online advertisements showed 
     her in various states of undress.
       That's how the vice unit of the Fresno Police Department 
     found her. Today, these strangers were both undercover 
     officers. Tonight, she will be safe.
       ``She said she hasn't eaten in five days,'' Sgt. Curt 
     Chastain said. ``No real family--an unreported runaway. She's 
     in the sex trade to survive.''
       ``She wants help,'' he continued. ``She wants to be in 
     school, but mom won't sign her up.''
       One of Chastain's undercover detectives confirmed this is 
     not a rare occurrence.
       ``I've had (sex trafficking) victims from every high school 
     in Fresno County--and most junior high schools,'' the 
     detective said. The Fresno Bee is not identifying him due to 
     the sensitivity of his work. These traffickers, he added, use 
     a variety of tactics to lure children and young women into 
     ``the life.''
       Full article available at: http://www.fresnobee.com/news/
special-reports/human-trafficking/article183592286.html
____


                  [From the Fresno Bee, Nov. 15, 2017]

     Once Sold for Sex, She Now Helps Lead the Fight Against Human 
                              Trafficking

                           (By Rory Appleton)

       Arien Pauls doesn't look like someone who's been through 
     hell.
       She flashes an easy smile as she speaks. Her voice is soft, 
     but her words are deliberate and flow with eloquence. She has 
     a distinct rockabilly style, with one arm bearing a tattoo 
     modeled from Disney's ``The Little Mermaid'' and a hair clip 
     featuring two large pink roses.
       Looking at her, it's hard to imagine that a man she loved 
     forced her into slavery. For four years, Pauls was sold for 
     sex on streets and in hotel rooms across the western half of 
     the United States. She was barred from contacting her friends 
     or family. She was arrested multiple times and treated like a 
     criminal--a stigma that even now, five years later, is 
     difficult to shake.
       Her worst moments seem unimaginable.
       Pauls' trafficker--a man she believed to be her boyfriend--
     refused to take her to a hospital when one of the men he sold 
     her to raped her. When she became pregnant with her 
     trafficker's baby, he forced her into an illegal, late-term 
     abortion. When her reeling body began to produce breast milk 
     after the abortion, her trafficker saw it as a moneymaker: 
     Those with certain fetishes would pay extra now, he told her.
       It took a daring late-night escape--her trafficker's SUV 
     roaring behind her getaway car on a Las Vegas street--to get 
     out of that life. But once she returned to Fresno, her arrest 
     record kept her from working in her chosen career, and she 
     has struggled with the mental scars inflicted during her past 
     life.
       Full article available at: http://www.fresnobee.com/news/
special-reports/human-trafficking/article184943988.html
____


                  [From the Fresno Bee, Nov. 16, 2017]

 How Do You Rescue Women Forced to Walk the Streets at Night? It's Not 
                                  Easy

                           (By Rory Appleton)

       For decades, the women rescued from the hotel rooms and 
     apartments in Fresno where they had been raped, beaten and 
     forced to have sex with strangers for money had few 
     alternatives.
       The first--and it was seldom optional--was jail. They could 
     also go to rehab, provided they had a drug problem. But more 
     often than not, they returned to the sex trade.
       That is no longer the case.
       In 2012, human trafficking became a crime in California, 
     carrying with it new language for dealing with the crime and 
     harsher penalties for traffickers. Local law enforcement 
     found success against traffickers by treating girls and women 
     in the sex trade as victims, not complicit criminals.
       Over the past few years, a growing network of advocates has 
     added new avenues of help for the hundreds of women who are 
     trafficked. These groups have provided victims with shelter, 
     counseling and the tools to rebuild their lives.
       Many who work with human trafficking victims consider the 
     practice to be modern-day slavery. If that's true, this 
     advocacy coalition is the underground railroad.
       Full article available at: http://www.fresnobee.com/news/
special-reports/human-trafficking/article184943793.html
____


                  [From the Fresno Bee, Nov. 28, 2017]

To Break the Cycle of Children Sold for Sex, the Legal System is Trying 
                             Something New

                           (By Rory Appleton)

       Defense attorney Kristin Maxwell remembers when a client 
     came to her Fresno office shortly after being discharged from 
     a hospital.
       The teenage girl had been beaten, raped and dumped in a 
     neighboring county. Police found her unconscious, lying naked 
     in an alley.
       ``There are some parts of the body that bruise easily, and 
     some that don't,'' said Maxwell, who's worked in the Fresno 
     County Public Defender's office for 11 years. ``Looking at 
     her, you knew she had been through it. She had been beaten 
     really badly.''
       This case stands out for its brutality, Maxwell said. But 
     it was the sheer number of human trafficking cases crossing 
     her desk when she took control of the Public Defender's 
     juvenile office in 2015 that shocked her into action.
       The legal community has partnered with advocacy groups, law 
     enforcement and the Fresno County Probation Department to 
     improve the criminal justice system in an effort to get 
     children out of the sex trade permanently. Their work will 
     soon bear fruit: On Jan. 19, Fresno County's juvenile court 
     will establish a courtroom dedicated solely to human 
     trafficking cases.
       This new court--patterned after similar courts in 
     Sacramento, Los Angeles and other California counties--will 
     allow a judge with specialized training to work with the 
     various partner agencies to ensure children caught up in the 
     sex trade receive help that's customized for their needs.
       Full article available at: http://www.fresnobee.com/news/
special-reports/human-trafficking/article186937063.html
____


                  [From the Fresno Bee, Dec. 7, 2017]

All of Us Must Help Beat the Scourge of Human Trafficking. Here's What 
                               You Can Do

                           (By Rory Appleton)

       Pimps have ensnared Fresno middle-school students who were 
     selling their bodies for extra spending money. Young women 
     have been tricked, blackmailed and forced into having sex 
     with strangers to support men they believed were their 
     boyfriends. People--especially children--with low self-
     esteem, mental illness, unstable home lives or living in 
     poverty are the preferred targets of an industry operating in 
     the shadows.
       Human trafficking is a complex issue. Police, advocacy 
     groups and the Fresno legal community have formed a unique 
     partnership to tackle the growing problem in new ways. But 
     what can the rest of Fresno do to fight human trafficking?
       Talking to your children or younger family members about 
     the issue can educate them

[[Page H1301]]

     and help keep them out of harm's way. Nonprofits that help 
     trafficking victims would welcome financial donations. 
     Residents can urge governments to allocate more resources to 
     those policing and prosecuting traffickers. And far larger 
     strides can be made to address a major underlying issue in 
     the sex trade: the people, mostly men, who buy sex.
       Full article available at: http://www.fresnobee.com/news/
special-reports/human-trafficking/article188526804.html

  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Donovan). All time for general debate has 
expired.
  Pursuant to the rule, the bill shall be considered for amendment 
under the 5-minute rule.
  It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose 
of amendment under the 5-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a 
substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary, printed in 
the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall 
be considered as read.
  The text of the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is 
as follows:

                               H.R. 1865

       Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 
     the United States of America in Congress assembled,

     SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

       This Act may be cited as the ``Allow States and Victims to 
     Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act of 2017''.

     SEC. 2. SENSE OF CONGRESS.

       It is the sense of Congress that--
       (1) section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
     U.S.C. 230; commonly known as the ``Communications Decency 
     Act of 1996'') was never intended to provide legal protection 
     to websites that unlawfully promote and facilitate 
     prostitution and contribute to sex trafficking;
       (2) websites that promote and facilitate prostitution have 
     been reckless in allowing the sale of sex trafficking victims 
     and have done nothing to prevent the trafficking of children 
     and victims of force, fraud, and coercion; and
       (3) clarification of such section is warranted to ensure 
     that such section does not provide such protection to such 
     websites.

     SEC. 3. PROMOTION OF PROSTITUTION AND RECKLESS DISREGARD OF 
                   SEX TRAFFICKING.

       (a) Promotion of Prostitution.--Chapter 117 of title 18, 
     United States Code, is amended by inserting after section 
     2421 the following:

     ``Sec. 2421A. Promotion or facilitation of prostitution and 
       reckless disregard of sex trafficking

       ``(a) In General.--Whoever uses or operates a facility or 
     means of interstate or foreign commerce or attempts to do so 
     with the intent to promote or facilitate the prostitution of 
     another person shall be fined under this title, imprisoned 
     for not more than 10 years, or both.
       ``(b) Aggravated Violation.--Whoever uses or operates a 
     facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce with the 
     intent to promote or facilitate the prostitution of another 
     person and--
       ``(1) promotes or facilitates the prostitution of 5 or more 
     persons; or
       ``(2) acts in reckless disregard of the fact that such 
     conduct contributed to sex trafficking, in violation of 
     1591(a),

     shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for not more than 
     25 years, or both.
       ``(c) Civil Recovery.--Any person injured by reason of a 
     violation of section 2421A(b) may recover damages and 
     reasonable attorneys' fees in an action before any 
     appropriate United States district court. Consistent with 
     section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
     230), a defendant may be held liable, under this subsection, 
     where promotion or facilitation of prostitution activity 
     includes responsibility for the creation or development of 
     all or part of the information or content provided through 
     any interactive computer service.
       ``(d) Mandatory Restitution.--Notwithstanding sections 3663 
     or 3663A and in addition to any other civil or criminal 
     penalties authorized by law, the court shall order 
     restitution for any offense under this section.
       ``(e) Affirmative Defense.--It shall be an affirmative 
     defense to a charge of violating subsection (a) where the 
     defendant proves, by a preponderance of the evidence, that 
     the promotion or facilitation of prostitution is legal in the 
     jurisdiction where the promotion or facilitation was 
     targeted.''.
       (b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents for such 
     chapter is amended by inserting after the item relating to 
     section 2421 the following:

``2421A. Promotion or facilitation of prostitution and reckless 
              disregard of sex trafficking.''.

     SEC. 4. COMMUNICATIONS DECENCY ACT.

       Section 230(e) of the Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 
     230(e)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(5) No effect on state laws conforming to 18 u.s.c. 
     1591(a) or 2421a.--Nothing in this section shall be construed 
     to impair or limit any charge in a criminal prosecution 
     brought under State law--
       ``(A) if the conduct underlying the charge constitutes a 
     violation of section 2421A of title 18, United States Code, 
     and promotion or facilitation of prostitution is illegal in 
     the jurisdiction where the defendant's promotion or 
     facilitation of prostitution was targeted; or
       ``(B) if the conduct underlying the charge constitutes a 
     violation of section 1591(a) of title 18, United States 
     Code.''.

     SEC. 5. SAVINGS CLAUSE.

       Nothing in this Act or the amendments made by this Act 
     shall be construed to limit or preempt any civil action or 
     criminal prosecution under Federal law or State law 
     (including State statutory law and State common law) filed 
     before or after the day before the date of enactment of this 
     Act that was not limited or preempted by section 230 of the 
     Communications Act of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230), as such section 
     was in effect on the day before the date of enactment of this 
     Act.

  The Acting CHAIR. No amendment to the committee amendment in the 
nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in House 
Report 115-583. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order 
printed in the report, by a Member designated in the report, shall be 
considered read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the 
report, equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not be not be 
subject to a demand for division of the question.


                Amendment No. 1 Offered by Mr. Goodlatte

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 1 
printed in House Report 115-583.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 5, beginning on line 12, strike ``contribute to sex 
     trafficking'' and insert ``websites that facilitate 
     traffickers in advertising the sale of unlawful sex acts with 
     sex trafficking victims''.
       Page 6, beginning on line 8, strike ``Whoever uses or 
     operates a facility or means of interstate or foreign 
     commerce or attempts to do so'' and insert ``Whoever, using a 
     facility or means of interstate or foreign commerce or in or 
     affecting interstate or foreign commerce, owns, manages, or 
     operates an interactive computer service (as such term is 
     defined in defined in section 230(f) the Communications Act 
     of 1934 (47 U.S.C. 230(f))), or conspires or attempts to do 
     so,''.
       Page 6, beginning on line 13, strike ``Whoever uses or 
     operates a facility or means of interstate or foreign 
     commerce'' and insert ``Whoever, using a facility or means of 
     interstate or foreign commerce or in or affecting interstate 
     or foreign commerce, owns, manages, or operates an 
     interactive computer service (as such term is defined in 
     defined in section 230(f) the Communications Act of 1934 (47 
     U.S.C. 230(f))), or conspires or attempts to do so,''.
       Page 7, line 1, strike ``Consistent'' and all that follows 
     through line 7.
       Page 7, line 11, strike ``offense under this section.'' and 
     insert the following: ``violation of subsection (b)(2). The 
     scope and nature of such restitution shall be consistent with 
     section 2327(b).''.
       Page 7, line 13, insert after ``subsection (a)'' the 
     following: ``, or subsection (b)(1)''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 748, the gentleman 
from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Virginia.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume.
  This amendment makes small but important changes to the bill.
  Most significantly, the bill narrows the class of defendants covered 
in the new section 2421A, which criminalizes the deliberate promotion 
or facilitation of prostitution. As the creation of this law is 
designed to target bad actor websites, this amendment narrows 
defendants covered to those who own, manage, or operate an interactive 
computer service with the intent to promote or facilitate prostitution. 
This amendment avoids creating a broad Federal law that covers conduct 
that is not necessarily Federal in nature.
  Second, the manager's amendment strikes language from the underlying 
bill's civil recovery provision that was intended to encourage victims 
to successfully plead their cases. However, the language could have 
created a risk of confusion by the courts, and so it has been removed.
  Further, the manager's amendment clarifies that mandatory restitution 
provision is only applicable to victims of sex trafficking, not to 
those who voluntarily have engaged in prostitution.
  Finally, the manager's amendment adds language inadvertently omitted 
from the original bill, which permits defendants who face an aggravated 
charge for promoting or facilitating more than five people to assert 
the statute's affirmative defense if a defendant can prove that 
advertisements were targeted to a locality where promotion or 
facilitation is legal.

[[Page H1302]]

  Mr. Chairman, this manager's amendment is the product of the 
Judiciary Committee's repeated and thoughtful effort to produce a 
workable and technically sound piece of legislation. This bill will do 
a great deal to protect victims of sex trafficking. I am proud of the 
hard work by my colleagues and staff to ensure that the criminal law is 
appropriately tailored to achieve that goal.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support this amendment, and I 
reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to claim the 
time in opposition, although I am not opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from Texas?
  There was no objection.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Texas is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I rise to support the Goodlatte 
amendment, and I thank the chairman along with our ranking member, Mr. 
Nadler, for their hard work in working together.
  I think this amendment is particularly important because it clarifies 
that the restitution provision applies to victims of sex trafficking 
and ensures that the affirmative defense applies to both of the 
criminal offenses created in the underlying bill. These changes are 
simple and reasonable.
  Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the Goodlatte Manager's Amendment, 
which makes technical changes to H.R. 1865.
  The amendment adds ``attempt'' language that was inadvertently 
omitted from the bill and is consistent with, and tracks the typical 
language used in the federal criminal code to define criminal offenses.
  The amendment also clarifies that the restitution provision applies 
to victims of sex trafficking and ensures that the affirmative defense 
applies to both of the criminal offenses created in the underlying 
bill.
  These changes are simple and reasonable and maintain the overall 
spirit of the bill
  Mr. Chairman, I support the amendment, and I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to support the 
amendment, and I yield back the balance of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Goodlatte).
  The amendment was agreed to.


       Amendment No. 2 Offered by Mrs. Mimi Walters of California

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 2 
printed in House Report 115-583.
  Mrs. MIMI WALTERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I have an amendment at 
the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Page 7, line 21, strike ``communications decency act'' and 
     insert ``ensuring ability to enforce federal and state 
     criminal and civil law relating to sex trafficking''.
       Page 7, line 22, strike ``Section 230'' and insert ``(a)In 
     General--Section 230''.
       Page 8, strike line 1 and all that follows through line 13, 
     and insert the following:
       ``(5) No effect on sex trafficking law.--Nothing in this 
     section (other than subsection (c)(2)(A)) shall be construed 
     to impair or limit--
       ``(A) any claim in a civil action brought under section 
     1595 of title 18, United States Code, if the conduct 
     underlying the claim constitutes a violation of section 1591 
     of that title;
       ``(B) any charge in a criminal prosecution brought under 
     State law if the conduct underlying the charge would 
     constitute a violation of section 1591 of title 18, United 
     States Code; or
       ``(C) any charge in a criminal prosecution brought under 
     State law if the conduct underlying the charge would 
     constitute a violation of section 2421A of title 18, United 
     States Code, and promotion or facilitation of prostitution is 
     illegal in the jurisdiction where the defendant's promotion 
     or facilitation of prostitution was targeted.''.
       Page 8, after line 13, insert the following:
       (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section 
     shall take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, 
     and the amendment made by subsection (a) shall apply 
     regardless of whether the conduct alleged occurred, or is 
     alleged to have occurred, before, on, or after such date of 
     enactment.

     SEC. 5. ENSURING FEDERAL LIABILITY FOR PUBLISHING INFORMATION 
                   DESIGNED TO FACILITATE SEX TRAFFICKING OR 
                   OTHERWISE FACILITATING SEX TRAFFICKING.

       Section 1591(e) of title 18, United States Code, is 
     amended--
       (1) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs 
     (5) and (6), respectively; and
       (2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
       ``(4) The term `participation in a venture' means knowingly 
     assisting, supporting, or facilitating a violation of 
     subsection (a)(1).''.

     SEC. 6. ACTIONS BY STATE ATTORNEYS GENERAL.

       (a) In General.--Section 1595 of title 18, United States 
     Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
       ``(d) In any case in which the attorney general of a State 
     has reason to believe that an interest of the residents of 
     that State has been or is threatened or adversely affected by 
     any person who violates section 1591, the attorney general of 
     the State, as parens patriae, may bring a civil action 
     against such person on behalf of the residents of the State 
     in an appropriate district court of the United States to 
     obtain appropriate relief.''.
       (b) Technical and Conforming Amendments.--Section 1595 of 
     title 18, United States Code, is amended--
       (1) in subsection (b)(1), by striking ``this section'' and 
     inserting ``subsection (a)''; and
       (2) in subsection (c), in the matter preceding paragraph 
     (1), by striking ``this section'' and inserting ``subsection 
     (a)''.
       Page 8, line 14, strike ``5'' and insert ``7''.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 748, the gentlewoman 
from California (Mrs. Mimi Walters) and a Member opposed each will 
control 5 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from California.
  Mrs. MIMI WALTERS of California. Mr. Chairman, I rise today in 
support of my amendment to H.R. 1865, the Allow States and Victims to 
Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act.
  I also want to thank my colleague, Ann Wagner, for her dedication to 
this issue and her efforts to bring this bill to the floor.
  The underlying bill will help crack down on online facilitators of 
human sex trafficking to end this modern-day slavery. My amendment will 
allow enforcement of criminal and civil sex trafficking laws against 
websites that knowingly facilitate online sex trafficking activities.
  Mr. Chairman, this issue is of significant local concern in the heart 
of my district in Orange County. Last year, a major international sex 
trafficking ring was uncovered in a quiet Irvine, California, 
neighborhood. Young women from overseas were sold repeatedly through 
the website Backpage.com.
  Websites like Backpage, which are essentially storefronts for the 
facilitation of sex trafficking, have been able to operate with 
impunity. My amendment, in conjunction with the underlying bill, will 
help prosecutors crack down on websites that knowingly facilitate or 
promote sex trafficking, while keeping in place safeguards for those 
who responsibly publish third-party content. This legislation will 
empower sex trafficking survivors to come forward and seek justice.
  Mr. Chairman, I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this bill 
and putting an end to the human sex trafficking industry in America, 
and I yield back the balance of my time.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition.
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from California is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chairman, section 230 of the Communications Decency 
Act stands for a very simple, powerful idea: a website should not be 
liable for the actions of its users.
  Because of section 230, we have the internet as we know it today. 
Also, because of section 230, the vast majority of websites can safely 
and effectively report and coordinate with law enforcement on various 
crimes, including sex trafficking, child pornography, and the like.
  Unfortunately, section 230 has been utilized by bad actors, including 
a notorious one, Backpage, to traffic in children and to exploit 
victims. Really, they are slavery victims. The underlying bill, H.R. 
1865, puts a stop to that. As the Department of Justice has noted, it 
will allow for the prosecution of people who are trafficking in victims 
online.
  The Walters amendment, however, for the first time, would carve a 
hole in section 230 and make it actually more difficult than the 
underlying bill to prosecute traffickers online. By creating potential 
liability for ``knowing'' that a user is using their website for 
facilitating sex trafficking, the Walters amendment would create what 
legal experts call the moderator's dilemma.
  There is no obligation under law to moderate your website. In fact, 
if you

[[Page H1303]]

have 2 million users or 10 million users, you really don't know what is 
being posted by your users. But under this amendment, if you made any 
effort to try and find out what was happening among your users--as many 
websites do today, especially for child pornography, but also for 
trafficking--you would incur liability because you would then have a 
reason to know.

                              {time}  1515

  Other laws that deal with intermediary liability, such as a 
requirement to report child pornography or copyright safe harbors of 
the DMCA, have very clear and specific provisions on when a website has 
sufficient knowledge and what express actions it should take. The 
Walters amendment has none of these. There is no case law on it either.
  So the amendment really would put web owners in a very weird place. 
If you do anything to moderate, you are risking liability. The safe 
incentive would be to not monitor at all. That would be tragic and it 
would be a gain for child predators, although I know that that is not 
the intention. You can't stop moderating just for trafficking. You 
either moderate or you don't moderate.
  We do know that there have been tremendous advances for machine-
operated filters to find child pornography. Actually, that is one of 
the easiest things to find, using filters, and it is very important 
that websites cooperate with law enforcement to catch those bad guys.
  Under the Walters amendment, the disincentive would be huge not to do 
that. I think that is why the Department of Justice does not support 
the Walters amendment.
  As I said earlier--and the chairman put the letter into the Record--
the Department believes that any revision to define participation in a 
venture is unnecessary. They say that, while well-intentioned, this new 
language would impact prosecutions by effectively creating additional 
elements that prosecutors would have to prove at trial.
  That is why it is a bad idea to adopt this amendment. As the chairman 
of the committee has said, section 4 of the amendment also violates the 
ex-post facto clause of the Constitution by attaching criminal 
liability to actions that preceded the enactment of the bill. This is 
clearly unconstitutional.
  Although I don't have any doubt as to the good intentions behind the 
offering of this amendment, it would actually impair the ability to 
protect victims. It would make it more difficult to prosecute, as the 
Department of Justice has pointed out.
  It didn't go through the Judiciary Committee. I think that is a major 
fault. One of the things we were able to do in the committee--and we 
did this together, on a bipartisan basis--was to sort through the 
unintended consequences of seemingly simple language.
  Nothing in writing law is simple. Certainly, nobody wants a provision 
that is going to negatively impact prosecutions; have unintended 
consequences for State actions, as the Department of Justice has 
pointed out; and would provide a disincentive for people to moderate 
activities to try and catch bad guys and to work with law enforcement.
  So, although the intentions are good, the amendment is flawed. I hope 
we vote ``no'' on it, and then I hope we give a resounding unanimous 
vote ``yes'' for the underlying bill.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. MIMI WALTERS of California. Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent 
to reclaim the time I yielded back.
  The Acting CHAIR. Is there objection to the request of the 
gentlewoman from California?
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. MIMI WALTERS of California. Mr. Chair, I yield to the 
gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. Wagner).
  Mrs. WAGNER. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding and for 
bringing up the Walters amendment to H.R. 1865, the Allow States and 
Victims to Fight Online Sex Trafficking Act, called FOSTA.
  The Walters amendment reinstates critical pro-victim provisions from 
my original bill. It also reflects the work that has been done in the 
Senate on these provisions, which are the meat of S. 1693, the Stop 
Enabling Sex Traffickers Act, or SESTA.
  FOSTA has over 175 House cosponsors and SESTA has over 67 Senate 
cosponsors. These two bills depend on each other to address the problem 
of online sex trafficking.
  Mr. Chair, we should not allow Big Tech money and special interests 
to try and overdefine this conversation and override our criminal 
justice system.
  FOSTA amends section 230 to allow for stronger criminal enforcement 
against websites that profit from human trafficking, and SESTA amends 
section 230 to allow for stronger civil enforcement against websites 
that profit from human trafficking.
  They are two sides of the same coin and they must pass together. We 
need both criminal and civil tools to properly combat the highly 
``lucrative'' industry of online sex trafficking.
  Moreover, it is imperative that we clarify that section 230 does not 
impair or limit the ability of trafficking victims to use the Federal 
private right of action that Congress clearly provided in the 
Trafficking Victims Protection Act.
  Two years ago, the First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that there is 
a fundamental tension between these private right of action and section 
230. Today, by voting ``yes'' on the Walters amendment, the House will 
dispel this tension. No website is immune from civil liability for 
knowingly facilitating the sale of trafficking victims.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Will the gentlewoman yield?
  Mrs. MIMI WALTERS of California. I yield to the gentlewoman from 
Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, a 16-year-old was found beaten and 
stabbed to death after being advertised as a prostitute on Backpage.
  I might suggest that we follow one great philosopher in California 
who asked: Can we all get along?
  This amendment is needed in order to give enhanced powers to State 
attorneys general that they can provide the extra litigation leverage 
for individuals who are impacted in a devastating manner.
  As I said, we have to be concerned about the First Amendment, but we 
have got to protect our children. Every time I think of this precious 
young lady, Desiree, and the tears of her mother who testified before 
the other body in the Senate hearing, I think it is important that we 
move forward. If we move forward, we can build on this legislation.
  I intend to offer additional legislation that we will need so that we 
can put a stop sign in front of the dastardly behavior of online sex 
trafficking.
  So I ask my colleagues to support the Walters amendment in order to 
ensure that we can move forward and, as we move forward, make a 
difference in the lives of these children.
  Mr. Chair, I rise in support of the Walters Amendment, which 
addresses problems states and local law enforcement agencies, 
prosecutors, and advocates have faced in their attempts to hold online 
sex traffickers responsible for their despicable behavior.
  Congress decided more than 150 years ago that no person--no woman, no 
child, no boy or girl--deserves to be bought, sold, or owned by another 
person.
  And, as I have said many times before, trafficking in human beings 
has no place in a civilized society.
  Our country is facing a crisis that touches urban cities, rural 
areas, and suburbs, and violates the fundamental American ideal of 
liberty--which sets this country apart from so many others.
  Traffickers hold their victims captive both physically and mentally, 
employing extreme forms of psychological abuse and coercion to main 
control over them and prevent them from escaping, while stripping them 
of their humanity.
  This is an ongoing battle with very high stakes. Several years ago, 
I, along with Chairman McCaul, held the first field hearing on human 
trafficking in Texas before the Committee on Homeland Security. At the 
time of the hearing, a stash house was raided and 115 people were 
rescued. I visited that location and saw first-hand, the atrocious 
conditions in which those people were forced to exist.
  Without the hard work of those Texas officers, I cannot fathom the 
torment that might have befallen those poor souls.
  As Ranking Member of the Judiciary Crime Subcommittee, I support the 
eradication of Human and Sex Trafficking. This vile cruelty must end.
  Anyone who aids, assists, facilitates or promotes such behavior must 
be held accountable.

[[Page H1304]]

  Just last week, I sat down with a room filled with anti-human 
trafficking advocates and representatives of anti-human trafficking 
advocacy groups, including Real Beauty Real Women and Break the Cycle. 
I heard stories of suffering and stories of frustrations.
  Victims and survivors are crying out for a change in the law and they 
are crying out for justice. They have tried to bring cases against the 
people, websites, and online service providers, who contributed to 
their suffering and profited from their victimization--to no avail.
  Prosecutors have tried to bring online sex traffickers and the 
companies who provide them safe harbor--and, unfortunately failed.
  It is imperative that we do all that we can to provide for victims of 
this disgusting crime, protect vulnerable members of society from 
becoming victims as well, and tell websites like Backpage.com.
  Sex trafficking is a callous and brutal crime that unquestionably 
deserves the nation's upmost attention. It is particularly difficult to 
see the victimization of the very young who are sold into the sex 
trafficking market.
  The SESTA amendment provides law enforcement, prosecutors, and courts 
at every level with the tools they need to hold responsible, both 
civilly and criminally, each and every bad actor who participates in, 
facilitates, contributes to, or profits from sex trafficking.
  Many of the groups that work with victims and survivors of sex 
trafficking support passage of H.R. 1865 only if Ms. Walters's 
amendment passes as well.
  Mrs. MIMI WALTERS of California. Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance 
of my time.
  The Acting CHAIR. The question is on the amendment offered by the 
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Mimi Walters).
  The question was taken; and the Acting Chair announced that the ayes 
appeared to have it.
  Ms. LOFGREN. Mr. Chair, I demand a recorded vote.
  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to clause 6 of rule XVIII, further 
proceedings on the amendment offered by the gentlewoman from California 
will be postponed.


               Amendment No. 3 Offered by Ms. Jackson Lee

  The Acting CHAIR. It is now in order to consider amendment No. 3 
printed in House Report 115-583.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I have an amendment at the desk.
  The Acting CHAIR. The Clerk will designate the amendment.
  The text of the amendment is as follows:

       Add at the end of the bill the following:

     SEC. 6. GAO STUDY.

       On the date that is 3 years after the date of the enactment 
     of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States 
     shall conduct a study and submit to the Committees on the 
     Judiciary of the House of Representatives and of the Senate, 
     the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 
     Representatives, and the Committee on Homeland Security and 
     Governmental Affairs of the Senate, a report which includes 
     the following:
       (1) Information on each civil action brought pursuant to 
     section 2421A(c) of title 18, United States Code, that 
     resulted in an award of damages, including the amount 
     claimed, the nature or description of the losses claimed to 
     support the amount claimed, the losses proven, and the nature 
     or description of the losses proven to support the amount 
     awarded.
       (2) Information on each civil action brought pursuant to 
     section 2421A(c) of title 18, United States Code, that did 
     not result in an award of damages, including--
       (A) the amount claimed and the nature or description of the 
     losses claimed to support the amount claimed; and
       (B) whether the case was dismissed, and if the case was 
     dismissed, information describing the reason for the 
     dismissal.
       (3) Information on each order of restitution entered 
     pursuant to section 2421A(d) of title 18, United States Code, 
     including--
       (A) whether the defendant was a corporation or an 
     individual;
       (B) the amount requested by the Government and the 
     justification for, and calculation of, the amount requested, 
     if restitution was requested; and
       (C) the amount ordered by the court and the justification 
     for, and calculation of, the amount ordered.
       (4) For each defendant convicted of violating section 
     2421A(b) of title 18, United States Code, that was not 
     ordered to pay restitution--
       (A) whether the defendant was a corporation or an 
     individual;
       (B) the amount requested by the Government, if restitution 
     was requested; and
       (C) information describing the reason that the court did 
     not order restitution.

  The Acting CHAIR. Pursuant to House Resolution 748, the gentlewoman 
from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee) and a Member opposed each will control 5 
minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentlewoman from Texas.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chairman, I have already raised the picture of 
Desiree, who is dead. Her death was driven by being exposed as a so-
called prostitute in the sex trafficking of a little girl on Backpage.
  Or J.S., who, in fact, was victimized in Seattle. She was raped. She 
was put on Backpage. Then she was rescued by her family. Since it was 
before this legislation, it failed in court.
  My legislation is very simple: Does this bill work? What more can we 
do?
  I am asking for a study where the GAO would be instructed to assess 
the damages awarded to victims and restitution amounts imposed against 
defendants as a result of this bill.
  Victims of sex trafficking require a multifaceted response to rebuild 
their life. That includes housing; counseling; job training; and, in 
many cases, drug treatment and rehabilitation. We as Members of 
Congress need to be able to know if it works.
  A citizen-led movement called Fight for Us, along with a team of 
influential citizens called The Houston 20, work to fill in the gaps 
and strengthen the services for victims and survivors in the city of 
Houston.
  I was very proud to meet with them at the Community of Faith Church, 
a socially motivated church, led by Bishop James Dixon. Jackie is the 
lead. They were all committed, Children at Risk and many other 
organizations, to eliminating some of the gaps for The Houston 20, 
which will allow them to utilize resources for greater work.
  So I ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I rise in support of my amendment to H.R. 1865 which 
requests the Government Accountability Office to study the 
effectiveness of the civil and restitution provisions enacted by H.R. 
1865.
  In an effort to determine if we are actually providing justice to 
victims of sex trafficking through this legislation, GAO would be 
instructed to assess the damages awarded to victims and restitution 
amounts imposed against defendants as a result of this bill.
  Victims of sex trafficking require a multi-faceted response to 
rebuild their lives that includes: housing, counseling, job training, 
and, in many cases, drug treatment and rehabilitation.
  There are well-meaning, dedicated victim advocacy groups all over the 
country, that offer their help and services that are dependent on state 
and federal grants, charitable donations, and private funding.
  A citizen-led movement called Fight For Us, along with a team of 
influential citizens called the Houston 20, work to fill in the gaps 
and strengthen the services for victims and survivors in my city of 
Houston. I commend these selfless individuals and hope that they 
continue their important work.
  Fortunately though, H.R. 1865 creates a civil cause of action for 
victims of the aggravated violation, and requires judges to impose 
mandatory restitution orders in criminal cases involving such victims.
  It is my hope that this measure will eliminate some of those gaps for 
the Houston 20 and allow them to utilize their resources for even 
greater work. Through this legislation, victims will be empowered to 
take control of their own recovery and restoration.
  My amendment will collect data on the civil awards and restitution 
orders, to determine whether victims are actually receiving the relief, 
assistance, and justice they require and deserve.
  My amendment primarily asks GAO to:
  (1) report the amounts of the damages awarded and the restitution 
amounts ordered; but also
  (2) report the amounts that are requested by victims and the 
government, on behalf of victims;
  (3) the nature and descriptions of the losses that are claimed and 
proven; and
  (4) the justifications for the amounts that are requested and 
eventually ordered to be paid.
  My amendment further asks GAO to report cases that are dismissed and 
provide information describing the reason or reasons for the 
dismissals.
  While it is Congress's duty to address the needs of our citizens by 
enacting sensible legislation, we are also responsible for monitoring 
the legislation we enact and determining whether we have truly 
responded to the needs of our citizens.
  For this reason, and all reasons previously stated, I ask my 
colleagues to support the Jackson Lee Amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, I claim the time in opposition to the 
amendment,

[[Page H1305]]

although I am not opposed to the amendment.
  The Acting CHAIR. Without objection, the gentlewoman from Alabama is 
recognized for 5 minutes.
  There was no objection.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, I support Ms. Jackson Lee's amendment requiring 
a GAO study. It is always helpful to require more information on the 
efficiency of a new law. This study will provide useful information to 
determine whether this legislation has proven to be the meaningful tool 
that we anticipate it will be. I commend Ms. Jackson Lee for 
introducing this amendment and for her commitment to combating sex 
trafficking.
  Mr. Chair, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from Missouri (Mrs. 
Wagner).
  Mrs. WAGNER. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman from Alabama for 
yielding.
  Mr. Chair, in recent years, sex trafficking has moved from the 
streets to the internet. The National Center for Missing and Exploited 
Children has witnessed an 846 percent increase in suspected child sex 
trafficking reports. Eighty-one percent of these reports concern online 
trafficking facilitated by websites that help traffickers post 
advertisements of child victims.
  I find it hard to imagine that if a neighborhood business hosted a 
slave auction, the auctioneer would not be considered liable. But that 
is actually what is happening with websites like backpage.com and 
hundreds others.
  I have spoken with State and local prosecutors across America who 
want to hold online advertisers accountable for facilitating traffic 
and promoting prostitution, but they cannot.
  Section 230 has been interpreted so broadly that courts have ruled in 
favor of backpage.com in criminal and civil cases, despite the 
website's clear criminal conduct. These rulings defy congressional 
intent.
  Twenty-two years ago, Senator Jim Exon from Nebraska, the sponsor of 
the Communications Decency Act, stated that ``the information 
superhighway should not become a red-light district.''
  Section 230 was an amendment to the CDA that intended to motivate 
websites to screen explicit content in ``good faith,'' and to shield 
websites from unfair liability for third-party content. However, 
section 230 was never intended to shield websites from liability for 
criminal conduct.
  Congress did not intend to allow businesses to commit trafficking 
crimes online that they could never commit offline. It never meant to 
imply that criminal conduct can hide behind the defense of legitimate 
publishing or editing.
  H.R. 1865 is a long-overdue clarification of section 230 explaining 
to America's courts that State and local prosecutors are not handcuffed 
from protecting their communities and that the State laws should be 
freely enforced against websites that unlawfully promote prostitution 
and sex.
  Mr. Chair, the Jackson Lee amendment will help us track the use of 
this new crime, and I am delighted to support it. I thank the 
gentlewoman for offering it.
  Mr. Chair, I am horrified that children and adults are sold on the 
internet like a T-shirt or takeout. I am horrified that human beings 
are sold with impunity and have no access to justice.
  Today, please vote ``yes'' for justice.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, how much time is remaining on each side?
  The Acting CHAIR. The gentlewoman from Texas has 3 minutes remaining. 
The gentlewoman from Alabama has 2 minutes remaining.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield 1 minute to the gentlewoman from 
Ohio (Mrs. Beatty).
  Mrs. BEATTY. Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewoman for yielding. More 
importantly, I thank her for her amendment. As the lead Democrat 
sponsor of this bill, I proudly join her with that amendment.
  Like my colleague Congresswoman Roby said, it is always good when you 
have a great bill that you can have an amendment that asks for a study 
to make sure that it is effective.

                              {time}  1530

  Lastly, let me just say, I thank the Congresswoman for sharing those 
stories, whether it is the story of Cathy, whether it is the story of 
Erika, or in my district, Theresa, it makes me proud to stand with her. 
And I thank her not only for this amendment but for her work in 
judiciary because what we know her amendment will do, it will protect 
the innocent.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, does the gentlewoman have any additional 
speakers?
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, I have no additional speakers.
  Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Chair, I yield myself such time as I may 
consume. I will close at this time.
  Mr. Chair, I thank the gentlewomen from Ohio and from New York. I 
thank Congresswoman Wagner. I thank Congresswoman Lofgren for her 
concern, as evidenced by her statement, but I want to focus on building 
blocks, and I want to say to fight for us in the coalition of 20 that I 
met with.
  My promise is that we are in building blocks. We are going to build 
on what we are doing today, and we are going to continue to mount the 
assault on sex trafficking and human trafficking, and we are going to 
literally wipe it out.
  We are going to wipe it out because of Shaundra. We are going to wipe 
it out because of this young, beautiful lady, 16 years old, Desiree. We 
are going to wipe it out because of Desiree. We are going to wipe it 
out because of J.S. We are going the wipe it out because Desiree was 
found beaten, stabbed to death, after being advertised as a prostitute 
on Backpage. We want her mother to know that we are outraged that 
children are treated in this way.
  My amendment will be the guidepost: Is what we are doing working? It 
will provide a report on the amounts of damages awarded, the 
restitution awarded, report the amounts that are requested by victims 
and the government on their behalf, the nature and description of the 
losses that are claimed and proven, the justification for the amounts 
that are requested and eventually ordered to be paid.
  My amendment asks GAO to report cases that are dismissed and provide 
information to describing the reason for those dismissals. We don't 
want anything to go under the rug. Our children are too important. I 
would ask my colleagues to support the Jackson Lee amendment.
  And in conclusion, I would say to those who I met with, to those 
groups around the Nation meeting in local communities thinking that 
they are alone fighting this dastardly act of sex trafficking and human 
trafficking, and, of course, a moneymaker like Backpage, you are not 
alone, we are starting today, we have done work before, and we are not 
going to stop. I will work with you for the ongoing blocks that are 
going to continue to stamp out online sex trafficking and human 
trafficking. With that, I ask for support of the legislation and my 
amendment.
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, I support Ms. Jackson Lee's amendment, and I 
urge my colleagues to vote ``yes.''
  Mr. Chair, I yield back the balance of my time
  The Acting CHAIR (Mr. Pittenger). The question is on the amendment 
offered by the gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson Lee).
  The amendment was agreed to.
  Mrs. ROBY. Mr. Chair, I move that the Committee do now rise.
  The motion was agreed to.
  Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. 
Donovan) having assumed the chair, Mr. Pittenger, Acting Chair of the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union, reported that 
that Committee, having had under consideration the bill (H.R. 1865) to 
amend the Communications Act of 1934 to clarify that section 230 of 
such Act does not prohibit the enforcement against providers and users 
of interactive computer services of Federal and State criminal and 
civil law relating to sexual exploitation of children or sex 
trafficking, and for other purposes, had come to no resolution thereon.

                          ____________________