Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Congressional research reportJan 28, 2015
Ask Donna
What actually matters in this document.
Text
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United
States: Overview and Issues for Congress
(name redacted)
Specialist in Domestic Security
(name redacted)
Specialist in Social Policy
(name redacted)
Specialist in Immigration Policy
January 28, 2015
Congressional Research Service
7-....
www.crs.gov
R41878
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Summary
The trafficking of individuals within U.S borders is commonly referred to as domestic human
trafficking, and it occurs in every state of the nation. One form of domestic human trafficking is
sex trafficking. Research indicates that most victims of sex trafficking into and within the United
States are women and children, and the victims include U.S. citizens and noncitizens alike.
Recently, Congress has focused attention on domestic sex trafficking, including the prostitution of
children, which is the focus of this report.
Federal law does not define sex trafficking per se. However, the term “severe forms of trafficking
in persons,” as defined in the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA,
P.L. 106-386) encompasses sex trafficking. “Severe forms of trafficking in persons” refers, in
part, to “[s]ex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or
in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age.... ” Experts
generally agree that the trafficking term applies to minors whether the child’s actions were forced
or appear to be voluntary.
The exact number of child victims of sex trafficking in the United States is unknown because
comprehensive research and scientific data are lacking. Sex trafficking of children appears to be
fueled by a variety of environmental and situational variables ranging from poverty or the use of
prostitution by runaway and “thrown-away” children to provide for their subsistence needs to the
recruitment of children by organized crime units for prostitution.
The TVPA has been the primary vehicle authorizing services to victims of trafficking. Several
agencies have programs or administer grants to other entities to provide specific services to
trafficking victims. Despite language that authorizes services for citizen, lawful permanent
resident, and noncitizen victims, appropriations for trafficking victims’ services have primarily
been used to serve noncitizen victims. U.S. citizen victims are also eligible for certain crime
victim benefits and public benefit entitlement programs, though these services are not tailored to
trafficking victims. Of note, specialized services and support for minor victims of sex trafficking
are limited. Organizations specializing in support for these victims may have fewer beds than
might be needed to serve all victims. Other facilities, such as runaway and homeless youth
shelters and foster care homes, may not be able to adequately meet the needs of victims or keep
them from pimps/traffickers and other abusers.
In addition, it has been suggested that minor victims of sex trafficking—while too young to
consent to sexual activity with adults—may at times be labeled as prostitutes or juvenile
delinquents and treated as criminals rather than being identified and treated as trafficking victims.
These children who are arrested may be placed in juvenile detention facilities instead of
environments where they can receive needed social and protective services.
Finally, experts widely agree that any efforts to reduce the prevalence of child sex trafficking—as
well as other forms of trafficking—should address not only the supply, but also the demand.
Congress may consider demand reduction strategies such as increasing public awareness and
prevention as well as bolstering investigations and prosecutions of those who buy illegal
commercial sex (“johns”). In addition, policy makers may deliberate enhancing services for
victims of trafficking. The most recent reauthorization of the TVPA, in March 2013, reauthorized
some existing provisions, created a new grant program to combat child sex trafficking, and
authorized appropriations through FY2017.
Congressional Research Service
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Contents
Overview of Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States ........................................................ 1
Conceptualizing Sex Trafficking of Children .................................................................................. 5
Sex Trafficking of Children: Vulnerable Populations................................................................ 6
Traffickers and Buyers .............................................................................................................. 7
Current Law ............................................................................................................................... 8
Federal Response to Sex Trafficking of Children ............................................................................ 9
Investigations of Child Sex Trafficking Offenses.................................................................... 16
Department of Justice (DOJ) ............................................................................................. 17
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) ........................................................................ 20
Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center ....................................................................... 20
Services for Child Victims of Sex Trafficking......................................................................... 20
Selected Issues ............................................................................................................................... 24
Funding and Authority to Assist U.S. Citizen and LPR Victims of Trafficking ...................... 24
Resources for Trafficking Victims’ Services ........................................................................... 27
Availability and Effectiveness of Services and Shelters .......................................................... 28
Response by the Child Welfare System ................................................................................... 29
Trafficking Victims Treated as Criminals or Delinquents ....................................................... 33
Reducing Demand for Minor Sex Trafficking in the United States......................................... 36
Data on Victims and Perpetrators ............................................................................................ 37
Tables
Table 1. Programs Authorized by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, as Amended,
That Could Address Sex Trafficking of Children within the United States ................................ 11
Table A-1. Number of Suspected Child Sex Trafficking Victims in Selected Locations ............... 41
Appendixes
Appendix A. Selected Studies Measuring Sex Trafficking of Children......................................... 39
Appendix B. Trafficking Victim Services for Noncitizens ............................................................ 44
Appendix C. Other Possible Federal Responses to Sex Trafficking of Minors ............................. 48
Contacts
Author Contact Information........................................................................................................... 51
Congressional Research Service
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Overview of Sex Trafficking of Children in the
United States
Human trafficking involves the exploitation of individuals for forced labor or commercial sex.
The trafficking of individuals within U.S borders is commonly referred to as domestic human
trafficking, and it occurs in every state in the nation.1 Of those individuals who are victims of sex
trafficking, research indicates that most victims coming into and within the United States are
women and children, and the victims include U.S. citizens and noncitizens alike. This report
focuses on the sex trafficking of children in the United States.
The investigation and prosecution of human trafficking has often been carried out by the states,
and all states and the District of Columbia have laws outlawing human trafficking, including sex
trafficking in children.2 Congress has focused recent attention on domestic sex trafficking of
children, which includes commercial sex acts involving children under the age of 18. Under the
Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA), the primary law that
addresses trafficking, sex trafficking of children is a federal crime—even if a child is not removed
from his or her community.3 Further, regardless of whether a child is believed to have consented
to sex or whether the child represents himself/herself as an adult,4 the child is considered a
trafficking victim under federal law.
The exact number of child victims of sex trafficking in the United States is unknown because of
challenges in defining the population and varying methodologies used to arrive at estimates.5 U.S.
citizens—adults and children alike—are more often victims of sex trafficking than labor
trafficking.6 One snapshot of the child victim population, albeit incomplete, comes from the
Department of Justice (DOJ)-funded Human Trafficking Reporting System (HTRS). Data in the
HTRS come from investigations opened by federally funded human trafficking task forces, and
do not represent all incidences of human trafficking nationwide. In January 2008, the task forces
1
For more information about trafficking generally, see U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June
2013, http://www.state.gov/j/tip/rls/tiprpt/2013/index.htm. See also CRS Report RL34317, Trafficking in Persons: U.S.
Policy and Issues for Congress, by (name redacted) and Liana Rosen.
2
See, for example, Ala. Code §13A-6-152; Ala. Code §13A-6-151(7); Alaska Stat. §§11-41-360 to 11-41-370; Ariz.
Rev. Stat. Ann. §13-1307; Ark. Code Ann. §5-11-108; and Cal. Penal Code §§236.1 to 237. For a comparison of state
laws, see Polaris Project, 2013 State Ratings on Human Trafficking Laws.
3
P.L. 106-386. This act is also called the Trafficking Victims Protection Act. The TVPA is codified under 22 U.S.C.
§7101 et seq., 42 U.S.C. §14044 et seq., and 18 U.S.C. §1591 et seq. (the criminal statute pertaining to sex trafficking
of children). Of note, sex trafficking may encompass a range of activities including prostitution, pornography, and
stripping. However, for purposes of this report, sex trafficking is discussed primarily in terms of prostitution. Further,
federal agencies have recently discussed sex trafficking in the context of the prostitution of children. For instance, see
U.S. Department of Justice, The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction: A Report to
Congress, August 2010, pp. 34-35. (Hereinafter, U.S. Department of Justice, The National Strategy for Child
Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction.)
4
The law provides that in prosecutions involving a child victim, the government is not required to prove that the
defendant knew that the person was under the age of 18. See 18 U.S.C. §1591(c).
5
Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation and
Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences, 2013, pp. 42-43. See also Appendix A.
(Hereinafter, Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual
Exploitation and Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences.)
6
U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2011. Conversely, noncitizens are more likely to be
victims of labor trafficking than of sex trafficking.
Congressional Research Service
1
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
began entering data into HTRS. Between January 1, 2008, and June 30, 2010, the task forces
opened 2,515 investigations of human trafficking; 82% of these were classified as sex
trafficking.7 Of these sex trafficking cases, 83% involved U.S. citizen victims and 40% involved
prostitution or sexual exploitation of a child.
Data from the National Human Trafficking Resource Center (NHTRC) can also provide a
snapshot into sex trafficking in the United States. The NHTRC, a program of the Polaris Project,
“is a national, toll-free hotline” that receives calls, texts, and tips on human trafficking.8 The
NHTRC determined that it received information on 4,884 potential trafficking cases in 2013.9 Of
these cases, 69% were categorized as sex trafficking incidents, and 31% involved potential minor
victims.10
Demand for sex with children (and other forms of commercial sexual exploitation of children) is
steady, and profit to sex traffickers, or pimps, has increased.11 Together, these and other factors
have helped fuel sex trafficking of children. Pimps/traffickers prey on vulnerable youth and
groom their victims to enter “the life” of being forced to sell sexual services for the profit of
others.12 They manipulate and abuse—physically, mentally, and emotionally—their victims to
maintain control. Additionally, technological advances such as cellular telephones and the
Internet have facilitated the demand for child sex trafficking. These technologies can rapidly
connect buyers of commercial sex with trafficking victims while simultaneously distancing the
perpetrator from the criminal transactions.13 The individuals who purchase sexual services from
7
Duren Banks and Tracey Kyckelhahn, Characteristics of Suspected Human Trafficking Incidents, 2008-2010,
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report, Washington, DC, April
2011. (Hereinafter Banks and Kyckelhahn, Characteristics of Suspected Human Trafficking Incidents, 2008-2010.)
Subject to appropriations, the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-164 §201)
required the Attorney General to use available data to perform a comprehensive analysis of the incidence of sex
trafficking and unlawful commercial sex acts within the United States. In response to this requirement, DOJ funded the
creation of the HTRS. These are the most recent data available.
8
Polaris Project, National Human Trafficking Resource Center (NHTRC), Hotline Statistics 2013.
9
Cases defined as moderate had “several indicators and red flags of potential trafficking situations, or resemble
common types of trafficking or trafficking scenarios but lack certain core details of force, fraud or coercion.” Cases
defined as high had “a high level of critical information” or demonstrated “key indicators relevant to identifying a
human trafficking situation.” Ibid., p. 5.
10
Ibid., pp. 6-7.
11
Meredith Dank et al., Estimating the Size and Structure of the Underground Commercial Sex Economy in Eight
Major US Cities, Research Report, Urban Institute, March 2014 (hereinafter, Meredith Dank et al., Estimating the Size
and Structure of the Underground Commercial Sex Economy in Eight Major US Cities); and U.S. Department of
Justice, The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction: A Report to Congress, Washington
DC, August 2010, pp. 32-33. For the purposes of this report, the terms “pimp” and “trafficker” are used
interchangeably when referring to the sex trafficking of minors.
12
Richard J. Estes and Neil Alan Weiner, Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in the U.S., Canada and
Mexico, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA, September 19, 2001 (revised February 20, 2002), p. 16.
(Hereinafter, Estes and Weiner, Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in the U.S., Canada and Mexico.)
Traffickers may be part of a criminal network or ring or they may operate independently. They can be strangers,
acquaintances, or family members.
13
U.S. Department of Justice, The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction. See also
Shared Hope International, DEMAND. A Comparative Examination of Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Jamaica, Japan,
the Netherlands, and the United States, Arlington, VA, July 2007. (Hereinafter, Shared Hope International, DEMAND.
A Comparative Examination of Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Jamaica, Japan, the Netherlands, and the United
States.) Note: The Shared Hope report was supported by a grant from the Department of State, Office to Monitor and
Combat Trafficking in Persons. Shared Hope is a nonprofit advocacy and policy organization founded by former
Congresswoman Linda Smith.
Congressional Research Service
2
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
pimps/traffickers are known as solicitors, purchasers, buyers, or “johns.” Solicitors of sex with
children may or may not be aware that the individuals with whom they are engaging in sex are
children or trafficking victims.
Commercial sexual exploitation of children appears to be fueled by a variety of individual (e.g.,
homelessness or history of child abuse), relationship (e.g., family conflict or dysfunction),
community (e.g., peer pressure or gang involvement), and societal (e.g., sexualization of children)
variables.14 These factors may interact in ways that can increase the risk of exploitation. Of note,
having one or more risk factors does not necessarily make a child vulnerable to sex trafficking
and other forms of exploitation.15 Further, certain other factors can also heighten risk of
exploitation, including the presence of large numbers of unattached and transient males in
communities—including military personnel, truckers, conventioneers, and sex tourists, among
others; and the recruitment of children by organized crime units for sex trafficking.16
Notably, studies have found that sex trafficking (and commercial sexual exploitation) is supplydriven as well as demand-driven.17 However, federal legislation has focused more extensively on
penalizing the traffickers and has placed less emphasis on the buyers of commercial sex. Experts
generally agree that any efforts to reduce the prevalence of sex trafficking—as well as other
forms of trafficking—should address not only the supply, but also the demand.18
The TVPA, most recently amended and reauthorized as part of the Violence Against Women
Reauthorization Act of 2013 (P.L. 113-4), has been the primary legislative vehicle authorizing
services to victims of trafficking. The TVPA historically focused on providing shelter and support
services to victims within the United States—particularly noncitizens.19 This may have been, in
part, because noncitizens were not eligible for those services—including healthcare, housing,
education, and legal assistance—to which U.S. citizen and lawful permanent resident (LPR)20
victims had access.21 U.S. citizen victims may be eligible for certain crime victim benefits and
public benefit entitlement programs, though these services are not tailored to trafficking victims.
14
Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation and
Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences.
15
Ibid.
16
Estes and Weiner, Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in the U.S., Canada and Mexico, p. 1.
17
Polaris Project, Why Trafficking Exists, http://www.polarisproject.org/human-trafficking/overview/why-traffickingexists. The Polaris Project is a nonprofit organization that works on human trafficking issues. See also Shared Hope
International, DEMAND. A Comparative Examination of Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Jamaica, Japan, the
Netherlands, and the United States.
18
Ibid. See also Iris Yen, “Of Vice and Men: A New Approach to Eradicating Sex Trafficking by Reducing Male
Demand Through Educational Programs and Abolitionist Legislation,” Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, vol.
98, no. 2 (Winter 2008); and Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting
Commercial Sexual Exploitation and Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences.
19
For more information on the history of the TVPA, see CRS Report RL34317, Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy and
Issues for Congress, by (name redacted) and Liana Rosen. Services authorized by the TVPA are available to victims of
both labor and sex trafficking.
20
A lawful permanent resident is a foreign national who is authorized to live and work in the United States
permanently. The term is synonymous with immigrant. In this report, the term “noncitizen victims” exclude LPRs, and
discussions of U.S. citizen victims include LPRs.
21
H.Rept. 106-487 to accompany H.R. 3244 outlined these services as necessary for the “safe reintegration of domestic
trafficking victims into the larger society.”
Congressional Research Service
3
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Further, “there is currently little data to assess the extent to which U.S. citizen trafficking victims
are accessing the benefits for which they are eligible.”22
Since its enactment in 2000, the TVPA has been reauthorized four times—in 2003 (P.L. 108-193),
2006 (P.L. 109-164),23 2008 (P.L. 110-457), and 2013 (P.L. 113-4). Through reauthorizations in
2006, 2008, and 2013, Congress increased focus on U.S. citizen and LPR victims and authorized
services specifically to address sex trafficking of children within the United States. In addition,
Congress requested a report, through P.L. 110-457, detailing any differences in services provided
to noncitizens and citizens.
In practice, services authorized through the TVPA for trafficking victims, which are provided
primarily by the Departments of Justice and Health and Human Services (HHS), continue to aid
primarily the noncitizen victim population.24 This may be a result of several factors. For one,
while Congress has expanded authorized funding to include victim services for trafficking victims
in the United States—irrespective of immigration status—appropriations for trafficking victims
services simultaneously remained relatively stable since the TVPA passed in 2000 through
FY2014. In other words, Congress has generally not appropriated additional funds for services
that target a broader spectrum of victims that have been subsequently authorized.25 Further,
appropriations have not specified which services should be funded, and program funding has been
an administrative decision within DOJ and HHS.26 Exploring the adequacy of victim services for
all victims of sex trafficking in the United States may be of interest for Congress if policy makers
choose to exercise oversight regarding the implementation of TVPA grant programs.
Another issue Congress may consider is the lack of specialized support for minor victims of sex
trafficking in the United States. Organizations in the United States that specialize in serving child
victims of prostitution and other forms of sex trafficking collectively have limited housing and
supportive services.27 Other facilities, such as runaway and homeless youth shelters as well as
foster care homes, do not appear to be adequate for meeting the needs of victims or keeping them
secure from pimps/traffickers and other abusers.28 Further, victims of trafficking may come to the
22
U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress and Assessment of U.S. Government
Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2011, January 2013, p. 32.
23
The bill was passed by Congress in 2005, but was not signed into law until 2006. As such, P.L. 109-164 is often
referred to as the 2005 reauthorization.
24
It appears that one program, DOJ Grants for Victim Services, has used funding specifically to serve U.S. citizen and
LPR victims. See Appendix B for further information about services for noncitizen victims. See also CRS Report
RL34317, Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress, by (name redacted) and Liana Rosen. Other
federal programs provide services to certain vulnerable populations such as children who have run away and/or are
sexually exploited. These programs, described in Appendix C, do not target minor victims of sex trafficking per se but
serve a broad population
25
For funding information, see CRS Report RL34317, Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress, by
(name redacted) and Liana Rosen.
26
Reportedly, in 2012, DOJ had a policy change which allows federal funding for victims services to support U.S.
citizen trafficking victims as well as foreign national victims. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June
2013, p. 381.
27
ECPAT USA and Shared Hope International, National Colloquium: 2012 Final Report: An Inventory and Evaluation
of the Current Shelter and Service Response to Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking, May 2013. (Hereinafter, ECPAT USA
and Shared Hope International, National Colloquium: 2012 Final Report.)
28
Heather J. Clawson and Lisa Goldblatt Grace, Finding a Path to Recovery: Residential Facilities for Minor Victims
of Domestic Sex Trafficking, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for
Planning and Evaluation, September 2007. (Hereinafter, Clawson and Grace, Finding a Path to Recovery: Residential
Facilities for Minor Victims of Domestic Sex Trafficking.)
Congressional Research Service
4
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
attention of child protective services (CPS), but CPS may not be able to adequately respond to the
needs of sex trafficking victims if workers are not knowledgeable about human trafficking, the
trafficking laws, or how to handle cases involving child victims.29 Child victims may also be
arrested and placed in juvenile detention facilities because they are perceived to be responsible
for prostitution (and other types of commercial sex acts) and/or because they often need
protection from sex traffickers.30
This report provides an overview of sex trafficking of children in the United States. It first
conceptualizes the issue, discussing the victims and perpetrators involved. It then outlines the
federal response to investigating and prosecuting perpetrators as well as providing services to
victims. The report concludes with a discussion of select issues concerning the federal response to
sex trafficking of minors in the United States.
Conceptualizing Sex Trafficking of Children
Federal law does not define sex trafficking per se. However, the term “severe forms of trafficking
in persons,” as defined in the TVPA, includes sex trafficking. “Severe forms of trafficking in
persons” refers to
(A) sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or
in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of age; or
(B) the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for labor or
services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjection to
involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.31
As part of this definition, a “commercial sex act” means “any sex act, on account of which
anything of value is given to or received by any person.”32 The commercial aspect of the sexual
exploitation separates trafficking from other crimes such as molestation, sexual assault, and rape.
There appears to be a consensus among experts that the prostitution of minors fits the definition
of “severe forms of human trafficking.”33 In the case of minors, there is general agreement in the
United States and much of the international community that the trafficking term applies to
children, regardless of whether the child’s actions are believed to be forced or voluntary.34
29
Loyola University Chicago, Center for the Human Rights of Children and the International Organization for
Adolescents (IOFA), Building Child Welfare Response to Child Trafficking, 2011, http://www.luc.edu/chrc/pdfs/
BCWR_Handbook_Final1_for_posting_1.pdf (hereinafter, Loyola University Chicago, Center for the Human Rights of
Children and the International Organization for Adolescents (IOFA), Building Child Welfare Response to Child
Trafficking).
30
Clawson and Grace, Finding a Path to Recovery: Residential Facilities for Minor Victims of Domestic Sex
Trafficking.
31
Section 103(8) of Div. A of P.L. 106-386, Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000; approved
October 28, 2000; 22 U.S.C. §7102. The remainder of the definition section relates to labor trafficking.
32
Examples include money, drugs, shelter, and food. P.L. 106-386, §103(3); 22 U.S.C. §7102. The money or item of
value given for the sex act does not need to be received by the child (i.e., can be received by a pimp/trafficker).
33
Child pornography for profit and stripping also fall under the definition of severe forms of trafficking.
34
Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, “The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children,” p. iv.
Congressional Research Service
5
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Sex Trafficking of Children: Vulnerable Populations
As mentioned, the exact number of children who are victims of sex trafficking does not exist
because comprehensive research is lacking. However, several studies have attempted to measure
the extent of the problem.35 Notably, the studies are not comparable, do not measure the same
populations, and do not use consistent terminology.36 For a discussion of studies that aim to
evaluate the scope of the commercial sexual exploitation and prostitution of children, see
Appendix A.
Runaways are particularly vulnerable to becoming victims of sex trafficking. A federally funded
study found that approximately 1.7 million youth had run away from home or were forced to
leave their homes at some point in 1999.37 While away from home, an estimated 38,600 (2.2%) of
these youth were sexually assaulted, were in the company of someone known to be sexually
abusive, or were engaged in sexual activity in exchange for money, drugs, food, or shelter.
Runaways may be perceived as easy targets for pimps/traffickers because they often cannot go
home and have few resources. One study involving a nationally representative sample of shelter
youth and interviews of street youth in multiple cities indicated that approximately 28% of street
youth and 10% of youth in shelters reported selling sex to generate money for basic needs (often
referred to as survival sex).38 Those youth under the age of 18 would be considered victims of sex
trafficking if they had sex with an adult in exchange for basic provisions. The study also pointed
out that the odds of engaging in survival sex increased for youth who had been victimized
(emotionally or physically),39 had participated in criminal behavior, had a history of substance
abuse, had attempted suicide, had a sexually transmitted disease (STD), or had been pregnant.
35
The 2012 U.S. Department of State Trafficking in Persons Report notes that the FBI has continued to develop
“technology to incorporate human trafficking offenses in the annual statistics collected from police forces nationwide”
and that these data are on track to be collected and reported starting in 2013. P.L. 109-164 (§201) requires biennial
reporting on human trafficking, using available data from state and local authorities. As previously mentioned, in
response to this requirement, DOJ funded the creation of the Human Trafficking Reporting System (HTRS).
36
Some have argued that the lack of reliable estimates is the result of (1) the hidden nature of the problem, (2) the
questionable methodologies of the studies, and (3) the lack of sufficient attention to the issue. Ellen Wright Clayton,
Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation and Sex Trafficking of
Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences. See also, Michelle Stransky and David Finkelhor, How
Many Juveniles are Involved in Prostitution in the U.S.?, Crimes Against Children Research Center, University of New
Hampshire, Durham, NH, 2008. (Hereinafter, Stansky and Finkelhor, How Many Juveniles are Involved in Prostitution
in the U.S.?)
37
Heather Hammer, David Finkelhor, and Andrea J. Sedlak, “Runaway/Thrownaway Children: National Estimates and
Characteristics,” U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, OJJDP
NISMART Bulletin, October 2002. These are the most recent survey data available. For purposes of this study, a
runaway episode is one that meets any one of the following criteria: a child leaves home without permission and stays
away overnight; a child 14 years old or younger (or older and mentally incompetent), who is away from home, chooses
not to come home when expected to and stays away overnight; and a child 15 years old or older who is away from
home, chooses not to come home, and stays away two nights. Nearly all (99%) of the children returned home, and most
(58%) did so within one week.
38
Jody M. Greene, Susan T. Ennett, and Christopher Ringwalt, “Prevalence and Correlates of Survival Sex Among
Runaway and Homeless Youth,” American Journal of Public Health, vol. 89, no. 9 (September 1999), p. 1406. These
youth were ages 12 to 21 and spent at least one night in the previous year in a youth or adult shelter, an improvised
shelter, or with a stranger. Youth under age 18 who had spent one night in the past year away from home without the
permission of their parents or legal guardians were also sampled.
39
This includes having been victims of assault or robbery.
Congressional Research Service
6
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
The Dallas Police Department also found a strong correlation between sex trafficking and
runaway status: the more times a child runs away, the greater the likelihood that he or she will be
victimized.40 The department also found that other risk factors among child trafficking victims
include their young ages, whether they had previously been sexually exploited, and whether they
had previously been victims of prostitution. Other research, including studies examining the
histories of prostitutes in Boston, Chicago, and San Francisco, has found that the majority of
prostituted women were runaways.41
According to a study funded by HHS, between 21% and 42% of runaway and homeless youth
were victims of sexual abuse before they left their homes.42 In the general youth population, this
prevalence is 1% to 3%. The Letot Center, a juvenile justice facility in Dallas that cares for youth
victims, has indicated that about 9 out of 10 youth in the Center had previously been physically or
sexually abused. Further, 10% of the youth had previously been involved with child protective
services (CPS).43 In addition to runaway and homeless youth, foster youth may also fall prey to
traffickers. According to anecdotal reports, it appears that traffickers target group homes and
other settings where foster youth congregate.44
Traffickers and Buyers
Victims of sex trafficking are exploited by pimps/traffickers who may operate alone or as part of
a criminal network. In the United States, traffickers range from teenage boys, young men, and
men and women who work for older male pimps to organized criminal syndicates operating both
within and across state and national lines.45 In a study of the underground commercial sex trade in
eight U.S. cities, traffickers cited certain factors that influenced their decision to become involved
in the industry, including exposure to sex work by family members, lack of job options, and
encouragement from a significant other or acquaintance.46
40
Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children, p. 34.
41
Heather J. Clawson and Lisa Goldblatt Grace, Human Trafficking Into and Within the United States: Review of the
Literature, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and
Evaluation, August 2009.
42
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Administration on
Children, Youth, and Families, Commissioner’s Office of Research & Evaluation and the Family and Youth Services
Bureau, “Sexual Abuse Among Homeless Adolescents: Prevalence, Correlates, and Sequelae,” November 2002,
http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/opre/fys/sex_abuse/reports/sexabuse_hmless/sex_abuse_hmless.pdf. (Hereinafter,
HHS, “Sexual Abuse Among Homeless Adolescents: Prevalence, Correlates, and Sequelae.”)
43
Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children, p. 35.
44
Ibid.
45
See Federal Bureau of Investigation press releases regarding domestic minor sex trafficking cases involving
individual perpetrators (e.g., http://www.fbi.gov/minneapolis/press-releases/2013/sioux-falls-man-convicted-in-sextrafficking-case) and perpetrators acting within criminal organizations (e.g., http://newyork.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/
pressrel10/nyfo042010.htm). For more information on organized crime in the United States, see CRS Report R41547,
Organized Crime: An Evolving Challenge for U.S. Law Enforcement, by (name redacted) and (name redacted). See
also Shared Hope International, DEMAND: A Comparative Examination of Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Jamaica,
Japan, the Netherlands, and the United States, p. 4.
46
Meredith Dank et al., Estimating the Size and Structure of the Underground Commercial Sex Economy in Eight
Major US Cities, pp. 282-283.
Congressional Research Service
7
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Pimps/traffickers profit by receiving cash or other benefits in exchange for the sexual use of an
individual by another person. It is more profitable for a trafficker to prostitute a child than to
commit other crimes such as dealing in drugs.47 For one, the commodity (child) is reusable. In
addition, technological innovation has allowed traffickers to reach a wider client base and connect
more quickly with buyers. Of note, when referring to the trafficking of minors, the terms “pimp”
and “trafficker” are synonymous. This does not necessarily hold true when referring to the
trafficking of adults. In the context of adults, a pimp who does not use force, fraud, or coercion to
induce adults to prostitute themselves would not be considered a trafficker. However, this
distinction is moot when the prostituted individuals are minors, with whom a pimp need not use
force, fraud, or coercion to be considered a trafficker.48
There is no single profile of a buyer of commercial sex with a minor, making buyers particularly
difficult to identify. In addition, there is little research on the factors associated with the risk of
becoming or being a buyer or exploiter.49 Research has suggested that these predators are often
encouraged by online solicitations, temptations, and exploitation.50 In addition to those actively
seeking out sex with minors, some buyers may engage in sex with minors unknowingly. The
perpetrators may assume that a prostituted individual is an adult. Alternatively, they may or may
not inquire about the age of that individual and may still decide to engage in a sex act even if she
or he is a minor.51
Current Law
Before 2000, U.S. laws were widely believed to be inadequate for dealing with human trafficking
or for protecting and assisting victims. Anti-trafficking legislation and programs have since been
implemented with the goal of improving the situation. The Victims of Trafficking and Violence
Protection Act of 2000 (TVPA, P.L. 106-386) was enacted on October 28, 2000. The TVPA
sought to punish traffickers and provide support for victims within U.S. borders.
Congress reauthorized the TVPA in 2003 (P.L. 108-193), in 2006 (P.L. 109-164), in 2008 (P.L.
110-457), and most recently in 2013 (P.L. 113-4). Of note, the Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-164), signed into law on January 10, 2006, sought to
address the special needs of child victims, as well as the plight of American victims trafficked
within the United States. The act sought to remedy a perceived inequality between the services
available to foreign and domestic victims by creating grant programs specifically to address the
needs of U.S. citizen and LPR victims.52 The William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection
Reauthorization Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-457)53 created a new grant program for U.S. citizen and
LPR victims, and it required a study identifying any gaps between services provided to U.S.
47
U.S. Department of Justice, The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction, p. 33.
Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center, Domestic Human Trafficking—An Internal Issue, December 2008, p. 5,
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/113612.pdf.
49
Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation and
Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences, pp. 108-115.
50
Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children, p. 17.
51
Ibid.
52
See U.S. Congress, Report to Accompany H.R. 972, 109th Cong., 1st sess., November 18, 2005, H.Rept. 109-317, p.
11.
53
P.L. 110-457 was signed into law on December 23, 2008.
48
Congressional Research Service
8
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
citizen and noncitizen victims of trafficking. The most recent TVPA reauthorization (P.L. 113-4)
amended one of the TVPA grant programs to authorize the Attorney General and Secretary of
HHS to make block grants to four entities throughout the United States for the specific purpose of
combatting the sex trafficking of minors.54 According to the Department of Justice, the TVPA is
considered the seminal piece of legislation in the fight against the commercial sexual exploitation
of children.55
Federal Response to Sex Trafficking of Children
The federal government investigates and prosecutes trafficking crimes and provides services to
victims, including those who are sex trafficked. The U.S. government has made strides since the
passage of the TVPA in 2000 in identifying and protecting victims, investigating and prosecuting
incidents of human trafficking, and training law enforcement and the public to identify instances
of trafficking. Nonetheless, the State Department’s 2013 Trafficking in Persons Report
recommends that, among other things, the United States increase funding for victim services;
improve interagency coordination; and “increase screening to better identify trafficked persons,
including adults and children arrested or detained for criminal offenses frequently associated with
human trafficking, youth served through the child welfare system, and runaway and homeless
youth being served through programs funded by [HHS].”56
As part of the response to punishing traffickers, the Departments of Justice (DOJ) and Homeland
Security (DHS) have primary responsibility for investigating and prosecuting trafficking cases.
Multiple federal statutes, including those enacted and amended by the TVPA, outlaw sex
trafficking of minors and include penalties for individuals who are found guilty. The federal
government also funds services for victims of trafficking. The TVPA, as amended, is the major
federal legislation that authorizes these services, which are provided primarily by DOJ and HHS.
There has been confusion regarding whether U.S. citizen, LPR, and noncitizen victims are
equally eligible to receive these services. In practice, these services tend to be targeted to aiding
noncitizen victims.57 A policy change at DOJ in FY2012 allows federal funding for victims
services to support U.S. citizen victims of human trafficking as well as noncitizen victims.58 In
addition, it appears that previously in FY2009, the DOJ Grants for Victim Services used funding
specifically to serve U.S. citizen and LPR minor victims of sex trafficking.
Table 1 summarizes programs authorized by the TVPA to combat and respond to trafficking of
children in the United States. The majority of programs appear to be able to address the
trafficking of U.S. citizen, LPR, and noncitizen victims alike. The programs include grants to law
enforcement for investigations and prosecutions as well as to social services and other providers
54
See Sec. 1241 of P.L. 113-4.
William Adams, Colleen Owens, and Kevonne Small, Effects of Federal Legislation on the Commercial Sexual
Exploitation of Children, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and
Delinquency Prevention, Washington, DC, July 2010, p. 1.
56
U.S. Department of State, Trafficking Persons Report, June 2013, p. 382.
57
See Appendix B for further information about services for noncitizen victims. See also CRS Report RL34317,
Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress, by (name redacted) and Liana Rosen. Other federal programs
provide services to certain vulnerable populations such as children who have run away and/or are sexually exploited.
These programs, described in Appendix C, do not target youth victims of sex trafficking per se.
58
Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2013, p. 381.
55
Congressional Research Service
9
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
of victims’ services. Only selected programs, including DOJ Grants for Victim Services and
HHS’s Victims’ Assistance program, have actually been funded. While both of these programs
have served noncitizen victims, only the DOJ Grants for Victim Services has used money to serve
U.S. citizen and LPR victims.
Congressional Research Service
10
Table 1. Programs Authorized by the Trafficking Victims Protection Act, as Amended,
That Could Address Sex Trafficking of Children within the United States
Agency, Program, and
Authorizing Statute
Description
Authorization of
Appropriations, per Title
XII of the Violence
Against Women
Reauthorization Act of
2013 (P.L. 113-4)
(unless otherwise noted)
Appropriations for FY2011
(P.L. 112-10)a; FY2012 (P.L.
112-55 and P.L. 112-74)b;
FY2013 (P.L. 113-6)c;
FY2014 (P.L. 113-76); and
FY2015 (P.L. 113-235)d
Population Served
(Directly or Indirectly)
Grants for Law Enforcement
Department of Justice (DOJ):
Grants to State and Local
Law Enforcement for Antitrafficking Programs
(P.L. 109-164, §204;
42 U.S.C. §14044c)
DOJ: Grants for Law
Enforcement Training
Programs
(P.L. 109-162 §111;
42 U.S.C. §14044f)
CRS-11
DOJ may award grants to state and
local law enforcement for programs
to (1) investigate and prosecute
severe forms of trafficking, and
related offenses that occur, in
whole or in part, within the United
States; (2) train law enforcement
personnel in identifying victims of
severe forms of trafficking; (3)
investigate and prosecute those
who engage in the purchase of
commercial sex and prioritize the
investigations and prosecutions of
cases involving minor victims; (4)
educate those individuals who have
been convicted of these and related
offenses; and (5) train law
enforcement to work specifically
with trafficking victims.
$10.0 million for each of
FY2014 through FY2017.
DOJ may award grants to state and
local governments to assist law
enforcement in identifying and
protecting victims of trafficking.
Funds may be used to train
prosecutors to identify, investigate,
or prosecute trafficking as well as
to utilize and develop laws to
prohibit trafficking.
$10.0 million for each of
FY2007 through FY2011.
Authorized by the Violence
Against Women and
Department of Justice
Reauthorization Act of 2005
(P.L. 109-162).
FY2011: No funds appropriated
FY2012: No funds appropriated
U.S. citizen and LPR victims of
trafficking.
FY2013: No funds appropriated
FY2014: No funds appropriated
FY2015: No funds appropriatedf
FY2011: No funds appropriated
FY2012: No funds appropriated
FY2013: No funds appropriated
FY2014: No funds appropriated
FY2015: No funds appropriatedf
Victims of trafficking generally.
Agency, Program, and
Authorizing Statute
Description
Authorization of
Appropriations, per Title
XII of the Violence
Against Women
Reauthorization Act of
2013 (P.L. 113-4)
(unless otherwise noted)
Appropriations for FY2011
(P.L. 112-10)a; FY2012 (P.L.
112-55 and P.L. 112-74)b;
FY2013 (P.L. 113-6)c;
FY2014 (P.L. 113-76); and
FY2015 (P.L. 113-235)d
Population Served
(Directly or Indirectly)
Grants for Victim Services
DOJ: Grants for Victim
Services
(P.L. 106-386;
22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(2)(A))
Department of Health and
Human Services (HHS) and
DOJ: Assistance for U.S.
Citizens and Lawful
Permanent Residents (P.L.
110-457, §107);
22 U.S.C. §7105(f))
CRS-12
DOJ may award grants to states,
Indian tribes, local governments,
and nonprofit, nongovernmental
victims’ services organizations to
develop, expand, or strengthen
service programs for victims of
trafficking in the United States.
$11.0 million for each of
FY2014 through FY2017.
HHS and DOJ (in consultation with
the Department of Labor) are to
establish a grant program to assist
U.S. citizens and LPRs who are
victims of severe forms of
trafficking. HHS and DOJ are to
consult with nongovernmental
organizations that provide victims
services to determine the assistance
that would be most beneficial to
victims. The program is to facilitate
communication and coordination
between assistance providers,
provide a means to identify such
providers, and provide a means to
make referrals to programs for
which victims are already eligible.
HHS and DOJ may award grants to
states, Indian tribes, local
governments, and nonprofit,
nongovernmental victims’ services
organizations.
$8 million for each of FY2014
through FY2017
(appropriation to HHS).
FY2011: $10.4 millione
Victims of trafficking generally.
FY2012: $10.5 million
FY2013: $12.6 million
FY2014: $14.3 million
FY2015: $42.3 millionf
FY2011: No funds appropriated
FY2012: No funds appropriated
FY2013: No funds appropriated
FY2014: No funds appropriated
FY2015: No funds appropriated
U.S. citizen and LPR victims of
trafficking.
Agency, Program, and
Authorizing Statute
HHS: Victims’ Assistance
(P.L. 106-386, §107(b)(1);
22 U.S.C. §7105(b))
DOJ and HHS: Grant
Program for Certain Persons
Subject to Trafficking
(P.L. 109-164, §202;
42 U.S.C. §14044a)h
CRS-13
Description
Authorization of
Appropriations, per Title
XII of the Violence
Against Women
Reauthorization Act of
2013 (P.L. 113-4)
(unless otherwise noted)
HHS is to expand benefits and
services to certain victims of severe
forms of trafficking in the United
States. (The law also directs other
federal agencies—Department of
Labor, Legal Services Corporation,
and the “heads of others Federal
agencies”—to expand services;
however, Congress has not
appropriated funds specifically for
this purpose.)
$14.5 million for each of
FY2014 through FY2017
DOJ, in consultation with HHS, may
make block grants to four entities
located in different regions of the
U.S. to combat sex trafficking of
children. These entities refer to
state or local units of government
that have significant criminal activity
involving sex trafficking of minors;
demonstrated cooperation between
federal, state, local, and where
applicable, other stakeholders, in
addressing sex trafficking of minors;
and developed a workable, multidisciplinary plan to combat sex
trafficking of minors. The grants
may be used to provide residential
care, social services, clothing and
other daily necessities, case
management, and legal services,
among other supports.
$8.0 million for each of
FY2014 through FY2017.
(this funding is also available
for other activities under 22
U.S.C. §7105(b), including
certification and victim
assistance to noncitizen
victims).
Appropriations for FY2011
(P.L. 112-10)a; FY2012 (P.L.
112-55 and P.L. 112-74)b;
FY2013 (P.L. 113-6)c;
FY2014 (P.L. 113-76); and
FY2015 (P.L. 113-235)d
FY2011: $9.8 million
FY2012: $9.8 million
FY2013: $9.3 million
FY2014: $13.8 million
Population Served
(Directly or Indirectly)
Individuals under the age of 18
who are victims of trafficking or
noncitizen adult victims who
have been certified by HHS as
eligible to receive services.
FY2015: $15.8 milliong
FY2011: No funds appropriated
under the former grant
program. See footnote e for
information about the former
program.
FY2012: No funds appropriated
under the former grant
program. See footnote e for
information about the former
program.
FY2013: No funds appropriated
FY2014: No funds appropriated
FY2015: No funds appropriatedf
U.S. citizen and LPR victims of
trafficking.
Agency, Program, and
Authorizing Statute
HHS: Pilot Program for
Residential Treatment
Facilities for Juveniles in the
United States
(P.L. 109-164, §203;
42 U.S.C. §14044b)
Description
HHS is to establish and carry out a
pilot program to establish
residential treatment facilities in the
United States for juveniles subject
to trafficking. The program is to
provide benefits and services to
juveniles at facilities (and to assess
the benefits and most efficient and
cost-effective means of providing
these facilities) that provide shelter,
psychological counseling, and
assistance in developing individual
living skills; and to assess the need
for and feasibility of establishing
additional facilities. HHS is to
provide grants to organizations that
have relevant expertise in providing
services to juveniles who have been
subjected to sexual abuse or
commercial sexual exploitation or
have entered into partnerships with
other organizations with this
expertise.
Authorization of
Appropriations, per Title
XII of the Violence
Against Women
Reauthorization Act of
2013 (P.L. 113-4)
(unless otherwise noted)
$5.0 million for each of
FY2008 through FY2011.
Authorized by the Violence
Against Women and
Department of Justice
Reauthorization Act of 2005
(P.L. 109-162).
Appropriations for FY2011
(P.L. 112-10)a; FY2012 (P.L.
112-55 and P.L. 112-74)b;
FY2013 (P.L. 113-6)c;
FY2014 (P.L. 113-76); and
FY2015 (P.L. 113-235)d
FY2011: No funds appropriated
FY2012: No funds appropriated
Population Served
(Directly or Indirectly)
Individuals under the age of 18
who are victims of trafficking.
FY2013: No funds appropriated
FY2014: No funds appropriated
FY2015: No funds appropriated
Source: Congressional Research Service.
Note: It is unclear whether the funds appropriated to HHS and DOJ for the grant programs above could be used to fund other grant programs. For example, the
language in the appropriations acts for HHS generally say that the funding “shall be available to carry out the Victims of Trafficking Act of 2000.” The language in the
appropriations acts for DOJ says that it includes funding “for victims services programs for victims of trafficking” as authorized under the Victims of Trafficking Act of
2000 (P.L. 106-386) and under the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109-164). Per 42 U.S.C. §7102(9), “severe form of trafficking” refers
to sex trafficking in which a commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform such act has not attained 18 years of
age; or (2) the recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision or obtaining of a person for labor or services, through the use of force, fraud, or coercion for the
purpose of subjection to involuntary servitude, peonage, debt bondage, or slavery.
CRS-14
a.
The Department of Defense and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2011 (P.L. 112-10) appropriated funding at the FY2010 level, with an across-the-board
rescission of 0.2%.
b.
Department of Justice programs and activities were funded under the Consolidated and Further Appropriations Act, 2012 (P.L. 112-55). Department of Health and
Human Services programs and activities were funded under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (P.L. 112-74). P.L. 112-74 appropriated funding at the
FY2011 level, with an across-the-board rescission of 0.189%.
c.
The Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (P.L. 113-6) generally funded discretionary non-security HHS and DOJ programs and activities at their FY2012
levels, minus an across-the-board rescission of 0.2%, as interpreted by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) per Section 3004 of P.L. 113-6. In addition,
discretionary non-security DOJ programs and activities were subject to an across-the-board rescission of 1.877%, per Sec. 3011. On March 1, 2013, under the terms
of the Budget Control Act of 2011 (P.L. 112-25), as amended by the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 (P.L. 112-240), President Obama ordered a
sequestration. The result is an across-the-board cut of an additional 5% for most DOJ and HHS programs and activities for FY2013. The FY2013 funding levels
provided in this table are based on operating plans provided by DOJ and HHS to Congress. The operating plan for the Administration for Children and Families
(ACF), which carries out the HHS Victims of Trafficking program, is available online: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/olab/resource/administration-for-children-andfamilies-all-purpose-table-fy-2012-2013. DOJ’s operating plan specifies funding for the Office of Justice Programs’ (OJP) Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA), which
carries out the DOJ Grants for Victim Assistance program; however, the plan does not specify an amount for that program.
d.
The Consolidated and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2015 (P.L. 113-235) notes that of the funds provided to the U.S. Attorneys, “each United States Attorney
shall establish or participate in a United States Attorney-led task force on human trafficking.”
e.
This amount reflects the 0.2% across-the-board rescission that was applied for FY2010, and an additional reduction that was applied proportionately to each
program funded under the account that contains the appropriation for Grants for Victim Services in FY2010. For more on this additional reduction, see CRS Report
R41161, Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies: FY2011 Appropriations, coordinated by (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name redacted).
f.
The FY2015 appropriations act states that for the DOJ state and local law enforcement assistance account, $42.3 million is appropriated “for victim services
programs for victims of trafficking, as authorized by section 107(b)(2) of Public Law 106–386, for programs authorized under Public Law 109–164, or programs
authorized under Public Law 113–4.” P.L. 106-386 is the original TVPA, and the other two laws amended the TVPA. Given the additional funding of more $30
million (compared to previous appropriations, all of which were allocated under Grants for Victim Services), it is unclear exactly which programs may be
encompassed by this appropriation.
g.
This amount is taken from the Explanatory statement accompanying P.L. 113-235. House of Representatives, “Explanatory Statement on Appropriations Regarding
the House Amendment to the Senate Amendment on H.R. 83,” Congressional Record, daily edition, vol. 160, part II (December 11, 2014), p. H9487. Section 4 of H.R.
83 provides that the Explanatory statement, when published in the Congressional Record, is to have the same effect as a conference agreement.
h.
P.L. 113-4 replaced a grant program under this section that authorized HHS to make grants to states, Indian tribes, local governments, and nonprofit,
nongovernmental victims’ services organizations for U.S. citizens or LPRs who are the subject of sex trafficking or severe forms of trafficking that occur, in whole, in
the United States. HHS is to give priority to applicants with experience in delivering services to victims of sexual abuse or commercial sexual exploitation and to
applicants who would employ survivors of sexual abuse or commercial sexual exploitation.
CRS-15
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Investigations of Child Sex Trafficking Offenses59
Investigations of human trafficking (including sex trafficking) are often complicated by language
barriers and humanitarian issues (e.g., the victim has been traumatized and is unable to aid in the
investigation), as well as logistical challenges and difficulties (e.g., transporting, housing, and
processing the victims). Moreover, unlike drug trafficking cases where the contraband itself is
proof of the illegal activity, the successful prosecution of trafficking in persons cases relies on the
availability of witnesses who may refuse to testify for various reasons, including fear of
retribution against themselves or their families.60
As mentioned, the investigation and prosecution of child prostitution is most often a matter of
state law. Every state outlaws the prostitution of children,61 and human trafficking in terms
sufficient to encompass sex trafficking in children.62 Within the federal government, DHS and
DOJ have primary responsibility for investigating (and DOJ is responsible for prosecuting) sex
traffickers, including those who traffic children. The majority of the cases are investigated by
agents in DHS’s Bureau of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) or DOJ’s Federal
Bureau of Investigation (FBI), who coordinate as appropriate. In addition, DOJ, through the Child
Exploitation and Obscenities Section (CEOS) in the Criminal Division and the Human
Trafficking Prosecution Unit (HTPU) in the Civil Rights Division, works with the U.S. Attorneys’
Offices to prosecute individuals who violate federal laws relating not only to trafficking, but also
to child pornography, child prostitution, obscenity, child sex tourism, and international parental
kidnapping. CEOS prosecutes sex traffickers under the TVPA and other laws relating to child
sexual exploitation. With specific respect to prosecuting the domestic sex trafficking of minors,
perpetrators are often prosecuted for violations of the Mann Act,63 the Racketeer Influenced and
59
This section is based on information in the U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2013; U.S.
Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of State, U.S. Department of
Labor, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and U.S. Agency of International Development, Assessment of U.S.
Government Efforts to Combat Trafficking in Persons, September 2007; and U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney
General’s Annual Report to Congress and Assessment of U.S. Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons:
Fiscal Year 2011, January 2013.
60
U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), Combating Alien Smuggling, Opportunities Exist to Improve the
Federal Response, GAO-05-305, May 2005, p. 10. (Hereinafter cited as GAO, Combating Alien Smuggling,
Opportunities Exist to Improve the Federal Response.)
61
U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2014.
62
For example, Ala. Code §13A-6-152 (“(a) A person commits the crime of human trafficking in the first degree if: (1)
He or she knowingly subjects another person to ... sexual servitude through use of coercion or deception. (2) He or she
knowingly obtains, recruits, entices, solicits, induces, threatens, isolates, harbors, holds, restrains, transports, provides,
or maintains any minor for the purpose of causing a minor to engage in sexual servitude.... ”); Ala. Code §13A-6151(7)(“Sexual servitude [is] ... any sexual conduct ... for which anything of value is directly or indirectly given,
promised to, or received by any person, which conduct is induced or obtained by coercion or deception form a
person.... ”); see also, Alaska Stat. §§11-41-360 to 11-41-370; Ariz. Rev. Stat. Ann. §13-1307; Ark. Code Ann. §5-11108; Cal. Penal Code §§236.1 to 237.
63
The Mann Act is codified at 18 U.S.C. § 2421 et seq. The Mann Act was enacted in 1910 to fight against forced
prostitution. As currently written, the Mann Act makes it a felony to knowingly transport “an individual who has not
attained the age of 18 years in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States,
with intent that such individual engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged
with a criminal offence.” The FBI investigates possible Mann Act violations and refers them to the U.S. Attorneys.
CEOS supervises the prosecution of these cases. William Adams, Colleen Owens, and Kevonne Small, Effects of
Federal Legislation on the Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children, U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice
Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, Washington, DC, July 2010, p. 3.
Congressional Research Service
16
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Corrupt Organization Act (RICO),64 or the TVPA.65 Specific statues available to prosecute such
crimes include, but are not limited to, the following:
•
18 U.S.C. §1591—Recruiting, enticing, or obtaining (including via force, fraud,
or coercion) individuals to engage in commercial sex acts, or benefiting from
such activities;
•
18 U.S.C. §2421—Transporting individuals across state or international lines for
prostitution or other unlawful sexual activities;
•
18 U.S.C. §2422—Enticing or coercing an individual to cross a state or
international line for prostitution or other unlawful sexual activities;
•
18 U.S.C. §2423—Transporting a minor across state or international lines for
prostitution or other unlawful sexual activities;
•
18 U.S.C. §2424—Keeping an alien in a house or place of prostitution; and
•
18 U.S.C. §2241(c)—Engaging in interstate travel for sexual activities with a
child under age 12, and sexual activities with a child under age 16.
Of these, only 18 U.S.C. §1591 is an anti-trafficking statute created in the TVPA. The provisions
created in other federal laws often reference that the crime is prosecutable so long as the victim is
brought across states lines; however, under the TVPA, victims do not have to be removed from
their communities in order for the crime to be considered eligible for prosecution. Further, the
majority of statutes used to prosecute trafficking offenses focus on prosecuting the traffickers, and
not as much focus has been placed on prosecuting the clients or “johns.” Another difference
between the prosecution of traffickers and the prosecution of buyers appears to be that traffickers
can be prosecuted whether or not a victim is brought across state lines. On the other hand, federal
statutes generally used to prosecute buyers appear to require that either the buyer crosses state
lines or that she/he entices the victim to cross state lines. In short, there may be more flexibility
and options for federal prosecutors to prosecute traffickers than to prosecute johns.
The following sections discuss efforts by DOJ and DHS to combat trafficking, including
prostitution and other forms of child sex trafficking.
Department of Justice (DOJ)
Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), Civil Rights Unit and the Violent Crimes
Against Children Section (VCACS)
While the Civil Rights Unit (CRU) of the FBI is responsible for overseeing of human trafficking
investigations “involving adults (domestic or foreign), foreigners, and any sex trafficking cases
involving foreign minor victims[, t]he Violent Crimes Against Children Section (VCACS) is
64
RICO is codified at 18 U.S.C. §1961-1968 and is Title IX of the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 (P.L. 91452). RICO allows for the prosecution of anyone who participates or conspires to participate in a criminal
enterprise/organization through two acts of “racketeering activity” within a 10-year period of time. The predicate
offenses for racketeering include various state and federal crimes listed in the U.S. Code. For more information on
RICO, CRS Report 96-950, RICO: A Brief Sketch, by (name redacted).
65
U.S. Department of Justice, The National Strategy for Child Exploitation Prevention and Interdiction, pp. 33-34.
Congressional Research Service
17
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
responsible for investigating cases involving the commercial sexual exploitation of domestic
minors.”66 These units may coordinate with other FBI components, such as the Organized Crime
and Violent Gang units to investigate these sex trafficking cases. The CRU opened 306 human
trafficking cases in FY2012; that same year, the VCACS67 opened an additional 363 cases
specifically related to the commercial sexual exploitation of children in prostitution in the United
States and had 302 convictions.68
The FBI, along with the Child Exploitation and Obscenities Section of DOJ and the National
Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), participates in the Innocence Lost
Initiative, an initiative dedicated specifically to combating sex trafficking of minors within the
United States. The FBI has established 66 Innocence Lost task forces and working groups around
the country.69 This has led to the conviction of over 1,300 perpetrators as well as the rescue of
2,700 children.70
Operation Cross Country in July 2013 swept 76 cities over three days, resulting in “the recovery
of 105 sexually exploited children and the arrests of 150 pimps and other individuals.”71 This was
the seventh iteration of this operation, which brings together federal and state law enforcement
entities, prosecutors, and social service providers to identify and recover trafficking victims.
The FBI also leads Violent Crimes Against Children Task Forces, which investigate, among other
things, sex trafficking of children. In FY2011, there were 26 such task forces, and by FY2013 the
number had expanded to 69.72
Anti-Trafficking Task Forces
Through the Anti-Human Trafficking Task Force Initiative, DOJ (via the Bureau of Justice
Assistance (BJA)) funds nationwide anti-trafficking task forces73 (at the end of FY2013, BJA was
funding 16 such task forces).74 These task forces are composed of federal, state, and local law
enforcement investigators and prosecutors and NGO victims service providers. The task forces
coordinate cases and conduct law enforcement training on the identification, investigation, and
prosecution of human trafficking cases. Research has reportedly shown that locales with task
forces are more likely to identify and prosecute trafficking cases.75
66
U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress and Assessment of U.S. Government
Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2012, July 2014, p. 41.
67
Through the Innocence Lost initiative (ILI).
68
U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress and Assessment of U.S. Government
Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2012, July 2014, p. 41-42.
69
These data are current as of June 2013. For more information, see http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/
vc_majorthefts/cac/innocencelost. These are the most recent published data.
70
Ibid.
71
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Operation Cross Country: Recovering Victims of Child Sex Trafficking, July 29,
2013; and U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2014, p. 399.
72
U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2014, p. 399.
73
Since 2004, DOJ has funded a total of 42 anti-trafficking task forces. Those task forces have identified 3,336 persons
as potential victims of human trafficking but it is unknown how many are domestic victims of sex trafficking. For more
information on the Initiative, see http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA/grant/httf.html.
74
U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2014, p. 399.
75
The number of investigations and prosecutions among the task forces varies widely. More investigations are for sex
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
18
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
ACT Task Forces
The Anti-Trafficking Coordination Team (ACTeam) Initiative was launched in 2011 as an
interagency coordination effort between “the Departments of Justice, Homeland Security, and
Labor aimed at streamlining federal criminal investigations and prosecutions of human trafficking
offenses.”76 Six pilot sites were launched in Atlanta, El Paso, Kansas City, Los Angeles,
Memphis, and Miami. DOJ, DHS, and DOL have continued to support these ACTeams.77
Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force Program78
The Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) Task Force program was first funded in 1998 to
provide federal support for state and local law enforcement agencies to combat online enticement
of children and the proliferation of pornography.79 The ICAC program has 61 regional task forces,
which are comprised of “more than 3,000 federal, state, and local law enforcement and
prosecutorial agencies that conduct investigations, forensic examinations, and prosecutions
related to online child victimization and pornography.”80
Since the ICAC program started in 1998, over 338,000 individuals—law enforcement officers,
prosecutors, and professionals in the United States and at least 17 other countries—have been
trained to investigate and prosecute cases involving Internet crimes against children.81 ICAC task
forces reviewed 8,565 complaints and arrested over 6,900 individuals suspected of involvement
in sexually victimizing children in FY2012.82
(...continued)
trafficking than labor trafficking, which may be a result of law enforcement’s ability to rely upon pre-existing vice
units devoted to prosecution enforcement. U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2010, p. 340.
76
Department of Justice, “Attorney General Eric Holder Speaks at the Meeting of the President’s Interagency Task
Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons,” March 15, 2012.
77
U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2013, p. 383; and U.S. Department of State,
Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2014, p. 399.
78
For more information on the task force program, see CRS Report RL34050, Missing and Exploited Children:
Background, Policies, and Issues, by (name redacted).
79
The program was formally authorized by the PROTECT Our Children Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-401). As outlined in the
law, program purpose areas include (1) increasing investigative capabilities of state and local law enforcement officers
in the detection, investigation, and apprehension of Internet crimes against children offenses or offenders—including
technology-facilitated child exploitation offenses; (2) conducting proactive and reactive Internet crimes against children
investigations; (3) providing training and technical assistance to ICAC task forces and other law enforcement agencies
for investigations, forensics, prosecutions, community outreach, and capacity building, using recognized experts to
assist in the development and delivery of training programs; (4) increasing investigations and prosecutions of Internet
crimes against children offenses; and (5) developing and delivering public awareness and prevention programs
regarding Internet crimes against children, among other purposes.
80
U.S. Department of Justice, FY2015 Performance Budget: Office of Justice Programs, March 2014, p. 19.
81
U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention,
Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force Program: Program Summary, http://ojjdp.gov/programs/
ProgSummary.asp?pi=3&ti=&si=&kw=&PreviousPage=ProgResults.
82
U.S. Department of Justice, FY2015 Performance Budget: Office of Justice Programs, March 2014, p. 88.
Congressional Research Service
19
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE)
The Human Smuggling and Trafficking Unit (HSTU) is the unit within ICE primarily responsible
for trafficking investigations (including sex trafficking). It coordinates with other units within
ICE—such as the Cyber Crimes Center and the Victim Assistance Program—and with units in
other agencies to combat sex trafficking. In FY2012, ICE initiated 894 cases with a nexus to
human trafficking,83 and recorded 967 criminal arrests, 559 indictments, and 381 convictions in
these and other trafficking cases initiated in previous years.84 The data, however, do not
distinguish the proportion of arrests for sex trafficking or labor trafficking, nor do they distinguish
the proportion of cases involving domestic or international victims. They also do not distinguish
the proportion of arrests that were made for violations related to minors or adults.
Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center
In July 2004, the Attorney General and the Secretaries of the Departments of State (DOS) and
Homeland Security signed a charter to establish the Human Smuggling and Trafficking Center
(HSTC). The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Protection Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458, §7202),
signed into law on December 17, 2004, formalized the HSTC. The HSTC serves as the federal
government’s information clearinghouse and intelligence center for all federal agencies
addressing human smuggling, human trafficking, and the potential use of smuggling routes by
terrorists. It is unclear how much of the HSTC’s resources are focused on minor victims of sex
trafficking. While the HSTC is the information repository for matters including trafficking, there
is no centralized database housing information on trafficking perpetrators, victims, outreach, and
other matters—although Congress mandated the creation of such a database in the TVPA
reauthorization of 2008.85 The 2011 Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S.
Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons indicated that the HSTC “concluded a
project with DHS’s Systems Engineering and Development Institute (SEDI) to inventory federal
human trafficking data sets and to assess the feasibility of creating a human trafficking
database.”86
Services for Child Victims of Sex Trafficking
The President’s Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons developed
a strategic action plan in 2013 for providing services to victims of human trafficking, both sex
and labor trafficking. The five-year plan was informed by a listening session hosted by HHS and
held at the White House in December 2012. It lays out four broad goals that are associated with
action items to identity and provide services to victims of trafficking:
83
This represents a 24% increase over the previous fiscal year.
U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress and Assessment of U.S. Government
Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2012, July 2014, pp. 42-43.
85
U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress and Assessment of U.S. Government
Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2011, January 2013, p. 20.
86
Ibid.
84
Congressional Research Service
20
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
•
increase coordination and collaboration at the federal, regional, state, tribal, and
local levels;
•
increase awareness of human trafficking among government and community
leaders and the general public;
•
expand access to services for victims throughout the United States; and
•
promote services that improve short- and long-term health, safety, and well-being
of victims.87
For example, the action items for the overarching goal of promoting services seek to develop
approaches to serving victims that have been rigorously tested. The plan notes that baseline and
follow-up data should be collected on service delivery strategies. It also outlines steps that
agencies are taking to identify promising practices to respond to trafficking victims.
As referenced in Table 1, the TVPA, as amended, authorizes services (primarily through DOJ and
HHS) to assist victims of trafficking within the United States. Some of these programs are aimed
at child victims of trafficking, particularly sex trafficking.88 In practice, funds appropriated to
HHS for trafficking have been used to carry out the program authorized under 22 U.S.C.
§7105(b). Under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b), it appears that HHS may provide assistance to two distinct
categories of victims: (1) any victim under the age of 18 and (2) any adult who HHS has
certified89 as a victim—a noncitizen adult victim.90 The statute does not specify the citizenship of
children. In practice, HHS provides services only to noncitizen children. Although noncitizen
trafficking victims under the age of 18 do not have to be certified to receive benefits and services,
it is HHS policy to issue eligibility letters to such noncitizen victims.
Because adult domestic victims do not go through the process of certification, there is some
confusion over whether U.S. citizens are eligible for services provided by HHS and other federal
agencies (including, as referenced under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b), the Department of Labor, the Legal
Services Corporation, and other federal agencies not including DOJ). Adult U.S. citizen and LPR
trafficking victims are not required to be certified by HHS, and indeed would not meet the criteria
to be certified because certification applies only to foreign nationals who need an immigration
status (e.g., T status or continued presence)91 to remain in the United States. Nonetheless, a 2007
87
President’s Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat Trafficking in Persons, Coordination, Collaboration,
Capacity: Federal Strategic Action Plan on Services for Victims of Human Trafficking in the United States 2013-2017,
Phase I: Initial Framework, April 2013. (Hereinafter, President’s Interagency Task Force to Monitor and Combat
Trafficking in Persons, Coordination, Collaboration, Capacity: Federal Strategic Action Plan on Services for Victims
of Human Trafficking in the United States 2013-2017.)
88
These statutes include 22 U.S.C. §7105(b), 22 U.S.C. §7105(f), 42 U.S.C. §14044a, 42 U.S.C. §14044b, 42 U.S.C.
§14044c, and 42 U.S.C. §14044f.
89
For more information on victim certification, see Appendix B. Certification of adult victims by HHS appears to be a
necessary condition of receiving trafficking victims’ services from HHS under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b).
90
22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(1)(C). The statute specifies that HHS, Department of Labor (DOL), the Legal Services
Corporation (LSC), and other federal agencies are to “expand benefits and services to victims of severe forms of
trafficking in persons,” defined as individuals who are under the age of 18 and adults who are the subject of
certification. For further information on services provided by DOL and LSC, see CRS Report RL34317, Trafficking in
Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress, by (name redacted) and Liana Rosen.
91
TVPA of 2000 created a new nonimmigrant category, known as T status or T-visa, for aliens who are victims of
severe forms of human trafficking. Federal law enforcement officials who encounter victims of severe forms of
trafficking and are potential witnesses to that trafficking may request that DHS grant the continued presence of the
alien in the United States. Historically, the Attorney General has had the discretionary authority to use a variety of
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
21
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
report by the Senior Policy Operating Group on Trafficking in Persons (SPOG) states, “there are
not many differences in trafficking victims’ eligibility for the services we reviewed when one
looks at the relevant statutes.” However, the report does note that U.S. citizen victims may have
less intensive case management services compared to noncitizens.92 In addition, only noncitizen
trafficking victims are eligible for refugee-specific programs.93
For services authorized under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(2), DOJ can use funds to provide services to
“victims of trafficking,” which appears to include both citizens and noncitizens as well as both
adults and minors. Of the money it has received to combat trafficking in persons prior to FY2015,
DOJ had targeted funds toward the Grants for Victim Services.94 Until FY2010, these grants had
exclusively been used to provide emergency services to victims as soon as they have been
identified, prior to certification by HHS (for more information, see Appendix B), but since then
some funds have been used for victims post-certification. In addition, in FY2012 DOJ changed its
policy so that federal funding for victims services could support U.S. citizen victims as well as
foreign national victims.95
Nonetheless, under the umbrella of this program, DOJ had previously used some funding to serve
domestic minor victims of sex trafficking through a program called Services for Domestic Minor
Victims of Human Trafficking.96 In FY2009, DOJ’s Office for Victims of Crime awarded
cooperative agreements, each for $800,000, for a period of three years to three organizations that
work with domestic minor victims of sex trafficking.97 Three additional organizations have
received DOJ support through other programs for these same purposes.98 The purposes of the
(...continued)
statutory and administrative mechanisms to ensure the alien’s continued presence. For more on immigration relief for
trafficking victims, see CRS Report RL34317, Trafficking in Persons: U.S. Policy and Issues for Congress, by (name r
edacted) and Liana Rosen.
92
Senior Policy Operating Group on Trafficking in Persons: Subcommittee on Domestic Trafficking, Final Report and
Recommendations, Washington, DC, August 2007, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/trafficking/SPOGReport-Final9-5-07.pdf.
93
CRS correspondence with the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and
Families, Congressional Affairs, April 2, 2007.
94
Given the increase in the amount appropriated to DOJ and the new appropriations language regarding anti-trafficking
funding, it is unknown how the appropriated money will be allocated between DOJ anti-trafficking grant programs in
FY2015. See Table 1.
95
U.S. Department of State, Trafficking In Persons Report: FY2012, June 2013; p. 381. The funding for this grant
program was distributed in five different program areas, only one of which is limited to foreign national victims. U.S.
Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress and Assessment of U.S. Government Activities to
Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2011, January 2013, p. 45.
96
The grant is authorized under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(2)(A), pertaining to grants made by the Attorney General to
develop, expand, or strengthen victim service programs for victims of trafficking in the United States.
97
The three organizations were Safe Horizon, a youth-service provider for runaway and homeless youth and other
vulnerable youth in New York; Salvation Army in Chicago, which seeks to combat sex trafficking of children; and
Standing Against Global Exploitation (SAGE), a provider of services to minor and adult victims of commercial sexual
exploitation in San Francisco. As part of their grant applications, the grantees demonstrated how comprehensive
services will be provided to both male and female victims of sex and labor trafficking, and documented how the
grantees will work collaboratively with juvenile justice system professionals, child welfare service providers, and other
youth-serving organizations to ensure that a comprehensive array of services are provided to victims. U.S. Department
of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of Crime, “Announcing the Awardees from OVC’s Services
for Domestic Minor Victims,” press release, 2009; and U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office
for Victims of Crime, OVC FY09 Services for Domestic Minor Victims of Human Trafficking Funding Announcement,
2009.
98
These other organizations are Girls Educational and Mentoring Services, Inc. (GEMS) and the Seattle Police
Department/Prostituted Youth Advocacy Project. See U.S. Department of Justice, Office for Victims of Crime, Grants
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
22
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
grant are to (1) provide a comprehensive array of timely and high-quality services, including
intensive case management and shelter, to victims of sex and labor trafficking who are U.S.
citizens or LPRs under the age of 18; (2) develop, enhance, or expand the community response to
domestic minor victims of all forms of human trafficking; and (3) produce a final report about the
implementation of the project so that OVC may disseminate lessons to the trafficking victims’
services field.99
While other HHS and DOJ programs authorized under TVPA (and referenced in Table 1 could
provide services to minor victims of sex trafficking, it does not appear that these programs
received funding prior to FY2015.100 For instance, the act directs the Secretary of HHS to carry
out a grant program for states, tribal governments, local governments, and nonprofit
nongovernmental victims’ service organizations to establish, develop, expand, and strengthen
assistance programs for U.S. citizens or LPRs who are the subject of sex trafficking or severe
forms of trafficking in persons that occur, in whole or in part, within the United States.101 The act
further directs the Secretary of HHS to establish a pilot program to establish residential treatment
facilities in the United States for juveniles subjected to trafficking within the United States.102 The
William Wilberforce Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-457)
reauthorized the two programs through FY2011.103 In addition, the act also created a new grant
program to be administered jointly by the Secretary of HHS and the Attorney General to provide
services to U.S. citizen victims of severe forms of trafficking.104 These programs, however, have
not received appropriations.
(...continued)
& Funding: OVC-Funded Grantee Programs To Help Victims of Trafficking, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/grants/
traffickingmatrix.html.
99
Between January 1, 2010, and June 30, 2010, these projects served 45 youths (both male and female) identified as
victims or potential victims of human trafficking and trained 2,623 service professionals. Referrals for services came
from law enforcement and community-based organizations. The majority of youth identified were victims of sex
trafficking; however, the sites continue to work in their communities to raise awareness about the possibility of labor
trafficking of youth who are U.S. citizens or LPRs. U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to
Congress on U.S. Government Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, p. 43.
100
Given the increase in the amount appropriated to DOJ and the new appropriations language regarding antitrafficking funding, it is unknown how the appropriated money will be allocated between DOJ anti-trafficking grant
programs in FY2015. See Table 1.
101
§202, 42 U.S.C. §14044a. In authorizing this program, Congress emphasized the importance of serving U.S. citizen
and LPR victims: “The Committee notes that, as a result of the TVPA, foreign victims of severe forms of trafficking in
the United States are legally required to be treated as victims, rather than as criminals. The same should be true for
American citizens. Nonetheless, a nongovernmental organization which advocates for exploited children, ECPATUSA, issued a 2005 report (Who Is There to Help Us? How the System Fails Sexually Exploited Girls in the United
States), which concluded, in relevant part, that ‘the implementation of the TVPA to date, both in terms of services and
prosecutions, has assisted girls from abroad while ignoring girls in similar situations from the U.S.’” Ibid., p. 24.
102
§203, 42 U.S.C. §14044b. In authorizing this program, Congress emphasized the importance of serving U.S. citizen
and LPR victims: “The Committee has learned from both governmental and nongovernmental sources who work with
trafficked children in the United States that a lack of housing options for such children is a debilitating impediment to
providing effective rehabilitative and restorative help to escape commercial sexual exploitation. This section [of the
law] responds to that need.”
103
The authorization levels for each year, FY2008 through FY2011, were $8 million for HHS grants for victims’
services for U.S. citizens and LPRs, $5 million for the residential treatment pilot program, and $20 million to DOJ
grants for law enforcement.
104
P.L. 110-457, §213, 22 U.S.C. §7105(f).
Congressional Research Service
23
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
In addition, the most recent TVPA reauthorization created a new grant program authorizing the
Assistant Attorney General for DOJ’s Office of Justice Programs to award one-year grants to six
grantees to combat sex trafficking of children in the United States.105 While this program was not
funded in FY2014, it appears to have received an appropriation for FY2015.106
In the Violence Against Women Act Reauthorization Act of 2013 (P.L. 113-4), Congress amended
several grant programs to add to their allowable activities serving victims of trafficking. For
instance, a newly consolidated program that includes three grant programs—Creating Hope
Through Outreach, Options, Services, and Education for Children and Youth (Choose Children
and Youth) Grant Program; the Grants to Indian Tribal Governments Program; and the Grants to
Indian Tribal Coalitions Program—all may be employed to serve victims of sex trafficking.107 A
discussion of programs, outside of the TVPA, that may provide assistance to minor victims of sex
trafficking (but are not directed to do so in authorizing statute or elsewhere) in the United States
is included in Appendix C.
In addition, other federal programs may be available to child trafficking victims who are citizens,
such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), selected programs administered
by the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), and Job
Corps.108 Nonetheless, little is known about the extent to which these services and benefits are
accessed by child victims/survivors of sex trafficking, and whether victims and service providers
are aware of such programs.109
Selected Issues
Funding and Authority to Assist U.S. Citizen and LPR Victims
of Trafficking
One overriding issue concerning minor victims of sex trafficking is the extent to which federal
agencies can and do provide services to U.S. citizen and lawful permanent resident (LPR)
trafficking victims. Originally, the Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act of 2000
(TVPA, P.L. 106-386) primarily targeted services toward noncitizen victims because they were
not eligible for existing federal human service programs for which U.S. citizen and LPR victims
105
Of the grant amounts, at least 67% must be allocated to nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) to provide
counseling, legal services, shelter, clothing, and other social services to victims, while not less than 10% has to be
allocated to provide services to victims or training for service providers on sex trafficking of children. Funds can also
be used for training for law enforcement; investigative and prosecution expenses; case management; salaries for law
enforcement officers and state and local prosecutors; and outreach, education, and treatment programs. The program is
authorized at $8 million a year for FY2014 through FY2017. P.L. 113-4, §1241(a).
106
Given the increase in the amount appropriated to DOJ and the new appropriations language regarding antitrafficking funding, it appears that this grant program received an appropriation, but uncertainty remains. See Table 1.
107
For a discussion of these and other grant programs authorized by P.L. 113-4, see CRS Report R42499, The Violence
Against Women Act: Overview, Legislation, and Federal Funding, by (name redacted).
108
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Services Available to Victims of Human Trafficking: A Resource
Guide for Social Service Providers, September 18, 2012.
109
Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation
and Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences, pp. 241-242.
Congressional Research Service
24
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
may have been eligible.110 As mentioned, U.S. citizen victims are eligible for certain crime victim
benefits and public benefit entitlement programs, though these services are not tailored to
trafficking victims. Further, the extent to which U.S. citizen victims rely upon these services is
unknown.
There has been disagreement over whether the services and programs authorized by the TVPA are
available to all victims, regardless of citizenship status. A 2010 U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)
report noted that U.S. citizen and foreign national victims of trafficking are treated differently
when they are identified, characterized, and offered services.111 In addition, service providers and
advocates report that federal legislation on commercial sexual exploitation often focuses on
foreign victims; as a result, providers often have difficultly securing social services for U.S.
citizen victims.112 Contributing to this concern may be the limited response provided by agencies
such as child protective services (CPS) that many may assume would be able to serve these U.S.
victims—discussed in detail below.
In response to perceived inequities between services provided to U.S. citizen and noncitizen
trafficking victims,113 the Trafficking Victims Protection Reauthorization Act of 2005 (P.L. 109164) enacted policies to assist U.S. citizen and LPR victims.114 In the conference report to
accompany the law, Congress highlighted concerns with the commercial sexual exploitation of
U.S. and LPR children in particular:
The United States not only faces an influx of international victims of sex and labor
trafficking, but also has a problem of internal trafficking (also referred to as domestic
trafficking), particularly of minors, for the purpose of commercial sexual exploitation. In
consultation with the committees of jurisdiction over domestic programs, the Committee
amended Title II of the bill, which addresses trafficking in persons that occurs within the
borders of the United States and victimizes United States citizens or permanent residents….
Among youth living on the streets in the United States, involvement in commercial sex
activity is a problem of epidemic proportion…. The Committee is concerned about U.S.
persons who become subjects of trafficking for commercial sexual exploitation and
encourages the law enforcement community at the State and local levels to focus efforts on
prosecuting individuals who exploit others through prostitution and trafficking. New
strategies and attention are needed to prevent the victimization of U.S. persons through
domestic trafficking.115
110
U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress and Assessment of U.S. Government
Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2011, January 2013; p. 32.
111
William Adams, Colleen Owens, and Kevonne Small, Effects of Federal Legislation on the Commercial Sexual
Exploitation of Children, Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency
Prevention, Washington, DC, July 2010, p. 4. This information comes from DOJ meetings with commercial child
sexual exploitation service providers.
112
Ibid., p. 7.
113
See, for example, Sarah Ann Friedman, Who Is There to Help Us? How the System Fails Sexually Exploited Girls in
the United States, ECPAT-USA, 2005, http://ecpatusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Who-Is-There-to-Help-Us.pdf.
114
The law also sought to encourage prosecutions of trafficking of U.S. citizens and LPRs. P.L. 109-164 directs the
Attorney General (as described in Table 2) to make grants to state and local law enforcement agencies to establish,
develop, expand, or strengthen programs to investigate and prosecute acts of severe forms of trafficking in persons that
involve United States citizens, or LPRs, and that occur in the United States, including investigating and prosecuting
persons who engage in the purchase of commercial sex acts. §204, 22 U.S.C. §7105(f).
115
U.S. Congress, House Committee on International Relations, Trafficking Victims Protection Act Reauthorization of
2005, committee print, 105th Cong., November 18, 2005, H.Rept. 109-317, p. 23.
Congressional Research Service
25
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
As mentioned, P.L. 109-164 authorized two programs specifically to provide services to minor
victims, one of which targeted U.S. citizen and LPR trafficking victims. Despite explicit language
in the TVPA, as amended, regarding assistance to U.S. citizen and LPR victims, appropriations
language has been unclear as to whether funds are available for this purpose. Each year since
FY2008, Congress has appropriated money to DOJ for programs for victims of trafficking and to
HHS to “carry out the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000.” DOJ funds have been used by
the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC) to provide services to noncitizens116 and, beginning in
FY2009, to carry out the Services for Domestic Minor Victims of Human Trafficking program.117
Funds have also been used to support the Anti-Human Trafficking and ACT Task Forces. HHS
funds have been used by the Office of Refugee Resettlement (ORR) to provide certification and
victim services and to carry out a public awareness campaign about trafficking.118 ORR has said
that services are not provided for U.S. citizens and LPRs because it believes that Congress has not
provided funding specifically for this purpose. Indeed, HHS funding to combat trafficking
remained stable between FY2002 and FY2013 at approximately $10 million; appropriated
funding did not increase after Congress authorized additional programs for minor victims of sex
trafficking, including U.S. citizens and LPRs. In FY2014, Congress increased appropriations (to
almost $14 million) for HHS to combat trafficking. Even with this increase, Congress directed
HHS to “dedicate a significant amount of the increase for the Victims of Trafficking program to
improve services for foreign national trafficking victims [emphasis added].”119 For FY2015, the
FY2015 Conference report provides $15.7 million to HHS to combat trafficking.120
Further, the FY2010 Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government
Activities to Combat Trafficking in Persons states, “the funds provided under the TVPA by the
federal government for direct services to victims are dedicated to assist non-U.S. citizen victims
and may not be used to assist U.S. citizen victims.”121 However, it appears likely that the funding
may be available for benefits and programs for U.S. citizens and LPRs, given that the TVPA
authorizes services for these victims. In fact, DOJ began funding a three-year grant in FY2009,
Services for Domestic Minor Victims of Human Trafficking,122 for U.S. citizen and LPR
victims.123 According to DOJ, this grant is authorized under 22 U.S.C. §7105(b)(2)(A), which was
116
Prior to FY2012, these funds could only be used for victims’ service prior to the time the noncitizen victim was
certified. Currently funds can be used for victims pre- and post- certification.
117
P.L. 112-10, P.L. 111-117, P.L. 111-8, P.L. 110-161. See Appendix B for further information about the precertification services.
118
See Appendix B for further information. ORR also provides services for victims of torture, certain U.S. citizens
seeking to repatriate to the U, unaccompanied alien children, and unaccompanied refugee minors. For further
information on the programs pertaining to children, see CRS Report RL33896, Unaccompanied Alien Children:
Policies and Issues (available upon request); and CRS Report RL34414, Unaccompanied Refugee Minors.
119
U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, Explanatory Statement Submitted by Mr. Rogers of Kentucky,
Chairman of the House Committee on Appropriations Regarding the House Amendment to the Senate Amendment on
H.R. 3547 Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2014, 113th Cong., 2nd sess., p. 58.
120
Representative Rogers, Explanatory Statement Regarding the House Amendment to the Senate Amendment on H.R.
83, Congressional Record, daily edition, December 11, 2014, p. H.
121
U.S. Department of Justice, Attorney General’s Annual Report to Congress on U.S. Government Activities to
Combat Trafficking in Persons: Fiscal Year 2010, p. 28.
122
DOJ also funded two projects for case management assistance to children found in prostitution, and one training and
technical assistance project targeted at 10 youth service organizations assisting children found in prostitution. It is
unclear if funding for these grant programs came from appropriations for the TVPA. U.S. Department of State,
Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2010.
123
The grant is authorized under §22 U.S.C. 7105(b)(2)(A), which pertains to grants made by the Attorney General to
develop, expand, or strengthen victim service programs for victims of trafficking in the United States. It is a program
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
26
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
included in the TVPA as enacted in 2000. The authorizing language of this grant program does
not appear to differentiate between U.S. citizen and noncitizen victims:
IN GENERAL.—Subject to the availability of appropriations, the Attorney General may
make grants to States, Indian tribes, units of local government, and nonprofit,
nongovernmental victims’ service organizations to develop, expand, or strengthen victim
service programs for victims of trafficking.124
Authorized funding for this grant appears to be inconsistent with the statement in the FY2008
Attorney General’s report that the funds appropriated under the TVPA can only be used for
noncitizen victims. Likewise, in FY2012 a policy change at DOJ allowed federal funding for
victim services to support U.S. citizen trafficking victims as well as noncitizen victims.125 Due to
the apparent confusion over the authority and funding available to provide services to U.S. citizen
trafficking victims, Congress may choose to clarify the authorities to provide services to these
victims under the TVPA.
Resources for Trafficking Victims’ Services
A corollary issue is the overall breadth of funding for victims’ services. It has been estimated that
there are approximately 14,000 noncitizens trafficked into the United States each year.126 And this
estimate does not include U.S. citizen and LPR victims. In addition, it is estimated that the
number of child victims of sex trafficking in the United States could be in the hundreds of
thousands. As the focus on sex trafficking has broadened to include victims of child prostitution,
funding has increasingly become an issue. In FY2015, Congress appropriated to HHS and DOJ
approximately $58 million for services to trafficking victims, a significant increase, mostly for
DOJ, from previous years. For information on current authorizations and appropriations for
trafficking victims’ services through HHS and DOJ, see Table 1.
This raises several questions. For one, are the resources for trafficking victims, both citizen and
noncitizens, adequate? The State Department’s 2013 Trafficking in Persons Report recommends
that the U.S. government “increase funding for relevant agencies to provide victim services both
domestically and internationally,” among other things, to more effectively combat trafficking in
persons.127 If funds were allocated based on estimated citizen populations and noncitizen
populations, would certain victims have more difficulty obtaining services? To what extent are the
needs of U.S. citizen and noncitizen victims similar and to what extent do they differ? As
mentioned, U.S. citizens and LPRs are more likely to be victims of sex trafficking and
noncitizens are more likely to be victims of labor trafficking. As such, should funding for victims
of trafficking generally be targeted to serve specific populations based on immigration status, or
(...continued)
that was in the TVPA as enacted in 2000. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Office for Victims of
Crime, “Announcing the Awardees from OVC’s Services for Domestic Minor Victims,” press release, 2009.
124
22 U.S.C §7105(b)(2)(A).
125
U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report, June 2013; p. 381.
126
U.S. Department of Justice, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, U.S. Department of State, U.S.
Department of Labor, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, and U.S. Agency of International Development,
Assessment of U.S. Government Efforts to Combat Trafficking in Persons, June 2004, p. 4. This is the most recent
estimate of noncitizens trafficked into the United States.
127
U.S. Department of State, Trafficking in Persons Report FY2012, June 2013.
Congressional Research Service
27
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
should it be targeted to providing specialized services for victims of a particular form of
trafficking (sex or labor trafficking) without regard to immigration status?
Availability and Effectiveness of Services and Shelters
The social services field provides services to child victims of sex trafficking through a variety of
strategies. Such strategies include (1) direct care and support services for victims and survivors;
(2) short- and long-term shelter; (3) curriculum development and education for children and
youth at risk for sex trafficking, victims, survivors, and victim service providers; (4) programs
designed to prevent sex trafficking of minors; and (5) hotlines operated to assist victims of
trafficking and provide them and others with referrals, among other types of supports. Services
are often provided by nongovernmental service providers, sometimes with support from the
federal government, state governments, and philanthropic entities.128
Nonetheless, services and shelter for victims/survivors are available on a limited basis. As
background for a 2012 colloquium on supports for child victims and survivors of sex trafficking,
a working group surveyed organizations that provide residential and other services to victims.129
Of the 51 organizations that responded to the survey, most (78%) said they provided communitybased care or case management; 19% reported providing foster care support; and 47% responded
that they provide residential care. They collectively reported having the capacity to provide
services for 1,684 child victims and shelter services for 226 child victims.130 Given that the
number of child victims is believed to be much higher, the shelter and services that are available
may only reach a fraction of children needing supports.
Moreover, little is known about the efficacy of these services. According to the National Academy
of Sciences’ report on child sexual exploitation and sex trafficking in the United States, “very few
evaluations of specific victim and support services have been conducted, and there are few
published reports and even fewer peer-reviewed studies on these services. As a result, victim and
support service professionals and programs lack a critically reviewed evidence base for
practice.”131 Still, some interventions for victims show promise. LIFESKILLS is a program in San
Francisco for victims and survivors at-risk of sex trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation,
as well as those at risk for exploitation. An independent evaluation of the program found that
participants had reduced contact with the criminal justice system, and reported significantly better
outcomes for sexual assault victimization; however, the program made no significant impact on
substance abuse, commitment to school, most measures of victimization, and social support.132
128
Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation
and Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences, pp. 235-270.
129
The working group was led by Shared Hope International, ECPAT-USA, and The Protection Project at Johns
Hopkins University School of Advanced International Studies. Shared Hope International and ECPAT-USA are
nonprofit organizations that advocate for victims of trafficking. The Protection Project is an institute that promotes
human rights. The survey was conducted in partnership with Children At-Risk, a nonprofit organization that advocates
for children. See, National Colloquium: 2012 Final Report, pp. 85-93. Twenty percent of organizations providing
shelter reported providing such shelter for seven days or less.
130
Ibid, p. 93.
131
Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation
and Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences, p. 253.
132
Marcia I. Cohen, Mark C. Edberg, and Stephen V. Gies, Final Report of the Evaluation of the SAGE Project’s
LIFESKILLS and GRACE Programs, May 2011, Development Services Group, Inc., prepared for the U.S. Department
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
28
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Despite the paucity of services and information about their effectiveness, recent efforts have been
made to identify best practices for serving child victims of trafficking. A 2012 colloquium of
social service providers and advocates made recommendations on providing such supports to
child victims. Some of their recommendations include that providers should assess the individual
needs of victims and place them into the most suitable emergency or long-term services; facilitate
communication among service providers; and work to ensure diverse placement options are
needed to prevent barriers to placement. In addition, the framework seeks to ensure that victims
have tailored treatment plans; residential facilities should be staffed with or have regular access to
medical and case professionals who can effectively assist victims through trauma-informed care;
and treatment plans are designed to help lead survivors toward independence.
Separately, as part of HHS’s work on sex trafficking of minors within the United States,
researchers identified—based on discussions with shelter providers, law enforcement officials,
case workers, and directors and staff of four residential facilities that serve minor victims of
domestic sex trafficking—promising elements for residential facilities for victims:
•
Residential facilities should be designed to serve homogenous populations of
trafficking victims. Victims may benefit from smaller, more intimate settings so
they can develop relationships more easily with staff and other victims.
•
Facilities must be secure in order to establish physical and emotional safety, and
should include an undisclosed location, security cameras and alarm systems, 24hour staffing and presence of security guards, unannounced room searchers and
drug screens, and limited phone use.
•
Services must be available to trafficking victims, including basic needs such as
clothing, food, and shelter; intensive case management; mental health counseling
and treatment; medical screenings and routine care; life skills and job training
programs; youth development programming; educational programming; and
services to assist youth in reunifying with their families or other appropriate
support persons, as appropriate.133
Response by the Child Welfare System
State and local child welfare agencies are responsible for carrying out child welfare policies that
are intended to promote the safety, well-being, and permanency of all children.134 Child victims of
sex trafficking may come to the attention of child welfare services if they are reported to the
(...continued)
of Justice, National Institute of Justice, Office of Research and Evaluation.
133
Heather J. Clawson et al., Study of HHS Programs Serving Human Trafficking Victims, U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, December 2009, p. iv.
(Hereinafter, Clawson and Grace, Finding a Path to Recovery: Residential Facilities for Minor Victims of Domestic Sex
Trafficking.) At the time of the study in 2007, the researchers identified only four facilities specific to the population
across the country: Girls Educational and Mentoring Services (GEMS) Transition to Independent Living (TIL) program
in New York; Standing Against Global Exploitation (SAGE) Safe House in San Francisco; Children of the Night in Los
Angeles County; and Angela’s House in a rural community outside Atlanta.
134
For further information, see CRS Report RL31242, Child Welfare: Federal Program Requirements for States, by
(name redacted).
Congressional Research Service
29
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
agency’s child protective services (CPS) hotline. In addition, children in foster care may be
vulnerable to becoming trafficked.
The capacity for state and local child welfare agencies to respond to the needs of sex trafficking
victims is believed to be limited. This may be due, in part, to inadequate training, insufficient
resources, high caseloads, and the perception that victims should be handled in the juvenile
justice system.135 A study commissioned by HHS found that child welfare group homes and other
foster care settings do not appear to be able to adequately meet the needs of youth or keep them
from traffickers and other abusers.136 In addition, these settings are often not equipped to provide
intensive services for victims or recognize the trauma they have experienced.137 Other research,
which examined the role of CPS workers in a small number of cities, found that these workers
were not familiar with human trafficking terms and laws or how to handle cases involving
trafficking of children.138
Reports of abuse and neglect can be screened in and referred for investigation by CPS only if they
concern actions that meet the state statutory definition of abuse and neglect. States that receive
state grant funds under the Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA) must define
“child abuse and neglect” to be consistent with this federal definition of abuse and neglect under
CAPTA: “at a minimum, any recent act or failure to act on the part of a parent or caretaker, which
results in death, serious physical or emotional harm, sexual abuse or exploitation, or an act or
failure to act which presents an imminent risk of serious harm.”139 The law also expands on the
term “sexual abuse,” which refers to “the employment, use, persuasion, inducement, enticement,
or coercion of any child to engage in, or assist any other person to engage in, any sexually explicit
conduct or simulation of such conduct for the purpose of producing a visual depiction of such
conduct; or the rape, and in cases of caretaker or inter-familial relationships, statutory rape,
molestation, prostitution, or other forms of sexual exploitation of children, or incest with
children.”140 The law does not, however, define “parent” or “caretaker.”
While some states refer to sexual abuse in general terms, others refer to more specific types of
abuse, including sexual exploitation.141 Forms of sexual exploitation include the production of
135
Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation
and Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences, pp. 186, 237-241.
136
Clawson and Grace, Finding a Path to Recovery: Residential Facilities for Minor Victims of Domestic Sex
Trafficking, pp. 2-4, 9.
137
The research literature indicates that experience of trafficking follows from, and contributes to, a history of trauma.
In guidance to states and service providers, HHS explained that victims of trafficking need appropriate care, including
the use of trauma-informed, culturally appropriate, and individualized care. See, U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services, Administration for Children, Youth, and Families, Guidance to States and Services on Addressing Human
Trafficking of Children and Youth in the United States.
138
Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, “The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children; ” Loyola University Chicago, Center for the Human Rights of Children and the International Organization for
Adolescents (IOFA), Building Child Welfare Response to Child Trafficking, 2011 (hereinafter, Loyola University
Chicago, Center for the Human Rights of Children and the International Organization for Adolescents (IOFA),
Building Child Welfare Response to Child Trafficking).
139
Section 111(2) of CAPTA, 42 U.S.C. §65101 et seq.
140
Section 111(4) of CAPTA, 42 U.S.C. §5106g. All states receive CAPTA state grants. For further information about
CAPTA, see CRS Report R40899, The Child Abuse Prevention and Treatment Act (CAPTA): Background, Programs,
and Funding, by (name redacted).
141
For further information about state definitions of abuse and neglect and procedures for screening abuse and neglect,
see Child Welfare Information Gateway, Definitions of Child Abuse and Neglect: Summary of State Laws (current
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service
30
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
child pornography or allowing a child to engage in prostitution. Several states also define persons
who can be reported to CPS as perpetrators. These are individuals who have a relationship with or
regular responsibility for the child and generally include parents, guardians, foster parents,
relatives, or other caregivers responsible for the child’s welfare. It appears that in some cases, this
could mean an adult over the age of 18 who is living with the child, but it is unclear whether a
pimp/trafficker could be included in this definition.
As enacted in October 2014, the Preventing Sex Trafficking and Strengthening Families Act (P.L.
113-183) requires state child welfare agencies to respond to concerns about sex trafficking of
children in foster care,142 including responding to those who run away from that care and those
who otherwise come into contact with the child welfare agency.143 Specifically, P.L. 113-183
amends the federal foster care program (authorized in Title IV-E of the Social Security Act) to
require state child welfare agencies to develop and implement procedures to identify, document in
agency records, and determine appropriate services for certain children or youth who are victims
of sex trafficking, or at risk of being such victims. The procedures need to ensure relevant
training for caseworkers and must be developed in consultation with state and local law
enforcement, juvenile justice systems, health care providers, education agencies, and
organizations with experience in dealing with at-risk children and youth. P.L. 113-183 provides
that these procedures are to be developed within one year of the bill’s enactment and
implemented within two years of that date.
The law further requires state child welfare agencies to report to law enforcement authorities
immediately, or in no case later than 24 hours, after they receive information about child or youth
victims of sex trafficking. This reporting provision is effective beginning no later than two years
after the bill’s enactment. Additionally, within three years of the law’s enactment, state child
welfare agencies are required to annually report to HHS the total number of children and youth
who are sex trafficking victims.
The procedures to identify, document in agency records, and determine services for victims of, or
those at risk of, sex trafficking must apply to all children in the care, placement, or supervision of
the state child welfare agency, including
•
children who are in foster care and under age 18 (or up to any age under 21, if the
state has elected to serve such older youth with Title IV-E foster care assistance);
•
children (under age 18) who are not in foster care but for whom the agency has
an open case file;
(...continued)
through July 2009), http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/define.pdf; and Child Welfare
Information Gateway, Making and Screening Reports of Child Abuse and Neglect: Summary of State Laws (current
through January 2009, http://www.childwelfare.gov/systemwide/laws_policies/statutes/repproc.pdf.
142
P.L. 113-183 draws from Section 103 of the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) to define a “sex trafficking
victim” as an individual subject to the “recruitment, harboring, transportation, provision, or obtaining of a person for
the purposes of a commercial sex act” or who is a victim of a “severe form of trafficking in persons” in which “a
commercial sex act is induced by force, fraud, or coercion, or in which the person induced to perform the act is under
18 years of age.”
143
For further information, see CRS Report R43757, Child Welfare and Child Support: The Preventing Sex Trafficking
and Strengthening Families Act (P.L. 113-183), by (name redacted), (name redacted), and (name r
edacted).
Congressional Research Service
31
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
•
current and former foster youth (up to age 21, or 23 in limited circumstances)
who are receiving services under the Chafee Foster Care Independence Program
(CFCIP); and
•
children who run away from foster care, provided they have not reached the age
at which the state ends Title IV-E assistance (or have not been formally
discharged from care).
In addition, a state may elect to use these procedures to identify individuals up to the age of 26
who are victims, or at risk of becoming victims, of sex trafficking, without regard to whether the
youth was ever in foster care.
Despite challenges with involving CPS in these types of cases, some states have recently taken
steps to track commercial sexual exploitation and/or prostitution cases under the broader category
of sexual abuse.144 Some have also begun to provide specialized foster care services for victims of
sex trafficking. The Connecticut Department of Children and Families screens in children who
are victims of sex trafficking (regardless if the offender is a relative), and a Trafficking Clinical
team of licensed clinicians assesses victims within 72 hours.145 Florida and Illinois also screen in
child victims of sex trafficking.146
One policy response could be to encourage or require state child welfare agencies to screen in
reports of commercial sex trafficking, including child prostitution, as a form of sexual abuse,
regardless of whether this abuse is perpetrated or facilitated by a parent or guardian.147 This
would expand on the requirements under P.L. 113-183 that compel states to respond to cases
involving children but do not necessarily specify that they be screened in for services (and
possible placement in foster care). Such changes could be made through amendments to federal
child welfare programs (under Titles IV-B and IV-E of the Social Security Act or CAPTA), which
provide funding for state child welfare programs.
Regardless of whether the federal government provides additional funding to child welfare
agencies to develop policies and possibly serve more children (including those who were not
necessarily involved in the child welfare system), states may have difficulties in placing children
in specialized foster or group homes, given that few facilities exist for victims generally. A
separate consideration is the extent to which the child welfare system should be tasked with
leading the social service response to child sex trafficking—and whether the federal government
should play a role in helping coordinate a response across multiple systems. As part of its report
on child sex trafficking, the National Academy of Sciences recommends, among other items,
improving collaboration and information sharing across multiple sectors such as the federal
144
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Emerging Practices
Within Child Welfare Responses,” May 2013; Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, The National Report on Domestic Minor
Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted Children, pp. 72-73; and U.S. House of Representatives, Congressional Foster
Youth Caucus and Victims’ Rights Caucus, “Strengthening the Child Welfare Response to Human Trafficking,”
briefing, July 18, 2012.
145
U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Finance, Sex Trafficking and Exploitation in America: Child Welfare’s Role in
Prevention and Intervention, 113th Cong., 1st sess., June 11, 2013.
146
Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation
and Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences, pp. 238-239.
147
For information about related legislation, see Legislation Pending in the 113th Congress That Addresses the Child
Welfare Response to Sex Trafficking of Children, by Adrienne Fernandes-Alcantara. Available to congressional staff
upon request.
Congressional Research Service
32
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
government, state and local governments, academic and research institutions, foundations and
nongovernmental organizations, and the commercial sector.148
Trafficking Victims Treated as Criminals or Delinquents149
Through the Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000, Congress legislated, essentially, that
juveniles who are involved in commercial sexual crimes are to be considered the victims of these
crimes.150 However, researchers have cited disparities in the ways that exploited children are
labeled at the state and local levels. It has been suggested that victims of child sexual
exploitation—even though these children are too young to consent to sexual activity with
adults—may at times be labeled as child prostitutes or juvenile delinquents and treated as
criminals rather than being labeled and treated as victims. These children who are arrested may
then be placed in juvenile detention facilities with juveniles who have committed serious crimes
instead of in environments where they can receive needed social and protective services.151 As
Shared Hope International observes, “while this sometimes is viewed as the only option available
to arresting officers, it is a practice that pulls the victim deeper into the juvenile justice system,
re-victimizes [the young person], and hinders access to service.”152 Like runaway and homeless
youth shelters, juvenile detention facilities provide treatment and services (in this instance,
services aligned with a youth’s pending charges) that are often unrelated to sex trafficking.
Consequently, these services may be ineffective at addressing the deeper issues facing victims.153
Further, victims may enter into the juvenile justice system in situations where law enforcement
does not know that the juvenile is a trafficking victim as well as in situations where law
enforcement is aware that the juvenile is a victim. For instance, a law enforcement officer who
has not been trained in identifying children as victims of commercial sexual exploitation may
mistakenly charge these children with a crime. Children may hide their identities by using fake
identification cards to protect the pimp, further reducing the likelihood that the children will be
identified as victims or that that the pimp will be prosecuted. On the other hand, an officer who
recognizes that an individual is a victim may charge the individual with a crime so as to place the
victim into one of the only available safe and secure environments—a detention facility within
the juvenile justice system. As mentioned previously, there are few safe facilities for child victims
of sex trafficking.
Results from the 2009 study conducted by Shared Hope International suggest that, in 9 out of 10
U.S. cities evaluated with respect to prostitution and other forms of commercial sexual
148
Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation
and Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences, pp. 337-342.
149
For more information on this issue, see CRS Report R43677, Juvenile Victims of Domestic Sex Trafficking: Juvenile
Justice Issues, by (name redacted).
150
See remarks by Senator Richard Durbin, Hearing before the U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on the Judiciary,
Subcommittee on Human Rights and the Law, In Our Own Backyard: Child Prostitution and Sex Trafficking in the
United States, 111th Cong., 1st sess., February 24, 2010.
151
Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, “The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children.”
152
Clawson and Grace, Finding a Path to Recovery: Residential Facilities for Minor Victims of Domestic Sex
Trafficking.
153
Ibid., p. 2.
Congressional Research Service
33
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
exploitation, victims had been placed in juvenile detention centers.154 There are no comprehensive
data, however, that address the number of prostituted or otherwise sexually trafficked juveniles
who are treated as offenders. Two studies do provide some insight into this number and how law
enforcement agencies process children who are prostituted. One of the only studies that has
attempted to gather these data relies on National Incident-Based Reporting System (NIBRS)155
data from 76 law enforcement agencies in 13 states. Findings from this study, conducted by the
Department of Justice, reveal that 229 juveniles were implicated as offenders in prostitution
incidents, and arrests were made in about 74% of those cases between 1997 and 2000.156
Although the percentage of juveniles involved in prostitution who were arrested is lower than the
percentage of adult prostitutes arrested (90%),157 this nonetheless suggests that in the sample
examined, juveniles were more likely to be treated as offenders than as victims.
In addition, as part of the National Juvenile Prostitution Study,158 juveniles were categorized as
victims, as delinquents, or as both victims and delinquents based on how they were treated by
police. Juveniles were categorized as being treated as victims if (1) only the exploiter was
arrested or (2) the juvenile and exploiter were arrested but the charge against the juvenile was not
a prostitution-related charge (e.g., disturbing the peace or a drug charge). Juveniles were
categorized as being treated as delinquents if they were the only ones arrested or detained. They
were categorized as being treated as both victims and delinquents if the exploiter was arrested on
a charge specific to a sexual assault against a minor and the juvenile was also arrested on a
prostitution-related charge. Based on this classification, 53% of juveniles were classified as
victims, 31% as delinquents, and 16% as both victims and delinquents. For the cases where a
child was classified as both a victim and delinquent, researchers examined the case summaries
more carefully to see whether they could be classified more accurately as victims or as
delinquents. In all cases, researchers were prompted to change the status to victim only because
either (1) the initial charges were dropped or (2) there was a specific comment from the
investigator that the only reason the juvenile was charged was so they could get needed services.
Overall, 69% of juveniles were ultimately classified as victims and 31% as delinquents.
The study found a strong and significant association between how the case came to the police’s
attention and how the juvenile was treated by law enforcement. Cases that began through a police
report (i.e., a report by the juvenile, a family member, a social service provider, or others) were
almost eight times more likely to result in the juvenile being treated as a victim than those cases
that began through action taken by the police (i.e., surveillance or undercover operations).
Juveniles were also more likely to be treated as victims if they were younger, female, frightened,
or were dirty or had body odor at the time of the initial encounter with police.
154
Ibid., p. 54.
NIBRS is part of the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program. Although both NIBRS and UCR are
incident-based reporting systems, NIBRS presents more detailed information about crime incidents than does the UCR.
NIBRS does not have as widespread of participation from state and local police, and the FBI has indicated that the data
are not sufficiently robust to make broad generalizations about crime in the United States. See the FBI’s website at
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm#nibrs. For more information about UCR and NIBRS, see archived CRS Report
RL34309, How Crime in the United States Is Measured, by (name redacted) and (name redacted).
156
David Finkelhor and Richard Ormrod, Prostitution of Juveniles: Patterns From NIBRS, U.S. Department of Justice,
Office of Justice Programs, Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, June 2004, p. 5.
157
Ibid.
158
Mitchell, Finklehor, and Wolak, “Conceptualizing Juvenile Prostitution as Child Maltreatment: Findings from the
National Juvenile Prostitution Study.”
155
Congressional Research Service
34
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Congress provides grants to states for juvenile justice through several avenues such as grants
within the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention Act (JJDPA).159 These grant programs
provide funding for an array of purposes including counseling, mentoring, and training programs;
community-based programs and services; after school programs; education programs; substance
and drug abuse prevention programs; mental health services; gang-involvement prevention
programs; and coordinating local service delivery among the different agencies involved, among
other purposes. However, none of the purposes directly specify services for victims of trafficking
or commercial sexual exploitation. As such, if victims of trafficking continue to be placed into the
juvenile justice systems, policy makers may consider whether to expand or specify the list of
purpose areas for which states may utilize juvenile justice grant funding.
Several policy options exist to address the issues in labeling victims of trafficking as perpetrators
of crimes. For example, Congress may consider whether to provide grant money for the purposes
of researching or establishing alternatives to detention for victims of child sex trafficking. A
related question that may arise is whether these alternatives should be available for domestic
victims and/or international victims, or whether this distinction should be made at all. Another
option Congress may consider is whether to provide funding for programs to train law
enforcement and social service providers to recognize possible indicators of trafficking and
subsequently identify the victims. If Congress decided to appropriate funds for these types of
programs, research would be needed to assess the reliability and validity of any trainings
utilized.160
Another option that researchers have proposed is encouraging states and localities to adopt what
have been referred to as “safe harbor” laws, preventing minor victims of trafficking from being
prosecuted for prostitution and ensuring that they are provided with specialized services.161 As
noted, under the TVPA, the federal government recognizes individuals under the age of 18 who
are involved in commercial sexual activity as victims rather than perpetrators. In addition, victims
of sex trafficking are eligible for specialized services. Researchers and victim advocates have
recommended that states adopt policies that are in line with the federal stance on child victims of
sex trafficking. In addition, the Attorney General is required to promulgate a model state
trafficking statute; the most recent TVPA reauthorization in 2013 updated this requirement to note
that this model statute should include the following safe harbor provisions:
(A) treat an individual under 18 years of age who has been arrested for engaging in, or
attempting to engage in, a sexual act with another person in exchange for monetary
compensation as a victim of a severe form of trafficking in persons;
(B) prohibit the charging or prosecution of an individual described in subparagraph (A) for a
prostitution offense;
159
The JJDPA was enacted by P.L. 90-415 and was most recently reauthorized by P.L. 107-273. For more information
on these programs, see CRS Report RL33947, Juvenile Justice: Legislative History and Current Legislative Issues, by
(name redacted).
160
For instance, according to Shared Hope International, after receiving training on identifiers of domestic minor sex
trafficking, one runaway youth shelter in Louisiana identified 57% of the youth in the shelter as trafficking victims.
Smith, Vardaman, and Snow, “The National Report on Domestic Minor Sex Trafficking: America’s Prostituted
Children,” p. 50. It is unknown, however, how these results may generalize to other social service and law enforcement
agencies that may receive such training.
161
Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation
and Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences, p. 8. See also Polaris Project, Safe
Harbor: Protecting Sexually Exploited Minors, August 2013.
Congressional Research Service
35
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
(C) require the referral of an individual described in subparagraph (A) to appropriate service
providers, including comprehensive service or community-based programs that provide
assistance to child victims of commercial sexual exploitation; and
(D) provide that an individual described in subparagraph (A) shall not be required to prove
fraud, force, or coercion in order to receive the protections described under this paragraph;162
A number of states have started adopting specialized courts that would help divert at-risk youth
(particularly girls at risk of prostitution) from the justice system and instead provide them with
specialized services. For example, there are “Girls Courts” in California163 and Hawaii,164 as well
as a network of 11 Human Trafficking Intervention Courts in New York.165 Policy makers may
debate whether to expand existing grant programs such that funds could be used to support such
efforts. They may also consider whether to create a separate path of federal support for such
diversion programs.
Reducing Demand for Minor Sex Trafficking in the United States
It is widely agreed upon that any efforts to reduce the prevalence of child sex trafficking—as well
as other forms of trafficking—must include efforts to reduce not only the supply, but also the
demand.166 Research has identified various factors that contribute to the demand for commercial
sex. One such factor contributing to the demand for younger girls is that buyers believe they are
less likely to contract a sexually transmitted disease from a younger girl.167 Another factor
influencing the demand for commercial sex is the technology boom; commercial sex is advertised
extensively on the Internet, and buyers are connected with victims through cell phones—allowing
traffickers to conduct business quickly and anonymously over the phone rather than face-to-face.
As succinctly noted by one recent study,
Given the broad range of factors associated with men purchasing sex, additional research is
needed to help support or refute the reasons currently proposed for why men buy sex and
more important, the motivators for purchasing sex with minors, to better explain the
biological, social, and cultural influences on this behavior.168
As experts have recommended increased research into the factors associated with purchasing sex,
policy makers may debate whether or not to further support this research, in either the private or
public domains—or both.
162
22 U.S.C. §7101 note.
“Courts Take a Kinder Look at Victims of Child Sex Trafficking,” NPR, March 1, 2014. See also Patricia Leigh
Brown, “A Court’s All-Hands Approach Aids Girls Most at Risk,” The New York Times, January 28, 2014.
164
State of Hawaii, Hawaii Girls Court, http://www.girlscourt.org/.
165
New York State Unified Court System, “NY Judiciary Launches Nation’s First Statewide Human Trafficking
Intervention Initiative,” press release, September 25, 2013.
166
One grant program under the TVPA (P.L. 109-164, 42 U.S.C. 14044c) includes strengthening demand reduction as
one of the allowable activities. This program would assist state and law enforcement to enhance their anti-trafficking
efforts, but the program has not been funded.
167
Shared Hope International, Demand: A Comparative Examination of Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Jamaica,
Japan, the Netherlands, and the United States, p. 5.
168
Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation
and Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences, p. 113.
163
Congressional Research Service
36
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Experts have also provided recommendations for demand reduction strategies that involve
increasing public awareness and prevention as well as bolstering investigations and prosecutions
of those buying illegal commercial sex. The federal government has already taken steps to
address demand reduction. For example, DOJ’s Office of Justice Programs funded a national
assessment of sex trafficking reduction efforts. This program sampled over 825 cities and
counties that have engaged in some form of demand reduction programs. Through the program,
researchers gathered intensive information from 274 sites including police and sheriff’s
departments, prosecutors, social service providers, and others. Researchers found that evidence
supporting the effectiveness of demand-reduction tactics “is robust in relation to evidence of the
effectiveness of other approaches” such as supply-reduction interventions.169 The researchers did
not, however, draw conclusions about the comparative effectiveness of specific demand-reduction
program models.
Policy makers may consider other policy options to reduce the demand for commercial sex with
minors. For instance, Congress may consider whether to provide further grant money designated
specifically for campaigns to increase public awareness of the issue. Also, some researchers have
suggested that increasing the age of consent in all commercial sex activities would be an effective
means of reducing the risk of misidentifying a minor as an adult.170 Congress may debate whether
this would also decrease the rate at which johns seek out minors for commercial sex or whether it
would only decrease the genuine misidentification of a minor as an adult. Yet another option that
Congress may consider is whether strengthening the federal anti-trafficking laws, particularly
with respect to the investigation and prosecution of buyers of commercial sex with minors. As
mentioned, one distinction between the prosecution of traffickers and the prosecution of buyers
appears to be that traffickers can be prosecuted whether or not a victim is brought across state
lines. On the other hand, federal statutes generally used to prosecute the buyers of commercial
sex appear to require that either the buyer crosses state lines or that he entices the victim to cross
state lines. Congress may also consider whether encouraging states to strengthen their laws to
provide harsher penalties for engaging in commercial sex activities with minors would deter
individuals from doing so. Policy makers may also debate whether providing funding to assist
states with investigations and prosecutions of these crimes would in turn reduce the prevalence of
buyers who are willing to engage in commercial sex with minors.
Data on Victims and Perpetrators
Studies of sex trafficking, including those involving sex trafficking of children in the United
States, are scarce. Those studies that do provide insight into the number of victims of child sexual
exploitation, such as those conducted by Estes and Weiner and Shared Hope International (see
Appendix A), provide estimates based on the number of youth who are at risk of trafficking or
were identified as victims in a small number of cities. Given the nature of sex trafficking,
estimating the number and characteristics of victims, pimps/traffickers, and johns is difficult.
Nonetheless, the TVPA required that the Department of Justice provide demographic and other
information related to sex trafficking in reports to Congress.171 Specifically, the act required
169
Michael Shively, Kristina Kliorys, and Kristin Wheeler, et al., A National Overview of Prostitution and Sex
Trafficking Demand Reduction Efforts: Final Report, Abt Associates, Grant #2008-IJ-CX-0010, April 30, 2012, p. v.
170
Shared Hope International, Demand: A Comparative Examination of Sex Tourism and Trafficking in Jamaica,
Japan, the Netherlands, and the United States, p. 148.
171
42 U.S.C §14044(a)(1).
Congressional Research Service
37
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
“review and analysis of sex trafficking and unlawful commercial sex acts in the United States” in
two reports. One of the two reports is to address severe forms of trafficking in persons, including
the estimated number and demographic characteristics of persons engaged in severe forms of
trafficking. The other report is to address sex trafficking, including the number and demographic
characteristics of persons engaged in sex trafficking and those who purchase sex acts; the
estimated value in dollars of the “commercial sex economy;” and the number of investigations,
arrests, and incarcerations of persons engaged in sex trafficking, including purchasers of sex
trafficking. DOJ has completed studies of severe forms of trafficking in persons by using a data
system known as the Human Trafficking Reporting System (HTRS), discussed above.172 These
data are based on human trafficking incidents that were opened for investigation by state and
local trafficking task forces. Approximately 40% of all incidents opened for investigation
involved children who were sex trafficked. It does not appear that DOJ has carried out the second
report on sex trafficking.
172
Banks and Kyckelhahn, Characteristics of Suspected Human Trafficking Incidents, 2008-2010.
Congressional Research Service
38
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
Appendix A. Selected Studies Measuring Sex
Trafficking of Children
Estimates of children who are victims of sex trafficking are scarce, and there is little to no
consensus on the value of existing estimates. The research literature includes studies that use
varying methodology, such as differences in how the population is defined, how data are collected
(e.g., estimates based on youth risk factors, interviews with stakeholders, police records, etc.),
and the geographic scope (e.g., city, state, or national) of the study.173 Some of these studies are
discussed below.
As part of their research on child sex trafficking and commercial sexual exploitation, the National
Academy of Sciences discussed these and other studies. Their report concluded that the despite
absence of strong evidence on the nature and extent of the problem, they should focus on how
federal and other stakeholders could make progress in addressing child sex trafficking and
commercial sex trafficking. The report discussed the challenges with focusing on better
prevalence and incidence studies, including cost. It suggested shifting focus and resources from
national-level counting to more targeted counting, such as the number of survivors from a
specified region or subpopulation receiving services, charges brought forth by prosecutors, and
successful convictions of exploiters and traffickers.174
Estes-Weiner Study
Richard J. Estes and Neil Alan Weiner estimated in their 2001 study that more than 244,000 youth
in the United States were at risk of becoming victims of prostitution and other forms of
trafficking.175 Importantly, the authors noted that this number did not reflect the actual number of
child exploitation cases. The study noted that the majority of victims tended to be runaway or
thrown-away youth who lived on the streets and became victims of prostitution. Generally, these
children came from homes where they had been abused or abandoned and often became involved
in prostitution as a way to support themselves.176
Estes and Weiner found that approximately 55% of girls living on the streets in the United States
engaged in formal prostitution, and of these girls, approximately 75% worked for a
173
Ellen Wright Clayton, Richard D. Krugman, and Patti Simon, eds., Confronting Commercial Sexual Exploitation
and Sex Trafficking of Minors in the United States, National Academy of Sciences, pp. 41-42.
174
Ibid.
175
The study was revised in 2002. The researchers use the term commercial sexual exploitation. Their definition of
commercial sexual exploitation of children includes child pornography, juvenile prostitution, and trafficking in
children. Estes and Weiner estimated that 244,000 children in the United States are at risk of becoming victims of sex
trafficking, but then reduced the estimate by 25% to minimize duplications in the counts of runaway and thrown-away
youth. Estes and Weiner, Commercial Sexual Exploitation of Children in the U.S., Canada and Mexico, pp. 10, 144151. This study has been criticized because, among other issues, the authors lack any evidence on how many of the “at
risk” youth actually become involved in prostitution. In addition, some have noted that there is duplication among the
counts of “at risk” youth. Michelle Stansky and David Finkelhor, How Many Juveniles are Involved in Prostitution in
the U.S.?, Crimes Against Children Research Center, University of New Hampshire, 2008, http://www.unh.edu/ccrc/
prostitution/Juvenile_Prostitution_factsheet.pdf. (Hereinafter, Stransky and Finkelhor, How Many Juveniles are
Involved in Prostitution in the U.S.?)
176
Ibid., pp. 2-4.
Congressional Research Service
39
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
pimp/trafficker.177 The average age at which girls first entered into prostitution was between 12
and 14 years, and the average age of entry into prostitution for boys was between 11 and 13 years.
The researchers also estimated that in the United States, approximately 156,200 homeless youth
were at risk of commercial sexual exploitation.178
National Juvenile Prostitution Study
The National Juvenile Prostitution Study surveyed nearly 2,600 law enforcement agencies
regarding individuals involved in juvenile prostitution in 2005. Data were collected on whether
agencies arrested or detained—in conjunction with a juvenile prostitution case—(1) youth under
age 18 or (2) adults ages 18 and older.179 In total, the study calculated 1,450 arrests and detentions
for crimes related to juvenile prostitution that year, including crimes committed by adults. The
study further found that 95% of the law enforcement agencies sampled made no arrests in cases
involving juvenile prostitution; in large jurisdictions where researchers assumed such cases would
be most likely, 56% of agencies reported no arrests or detentions. Based on these findings, the
researchers suggested that, at least in larger communities, police were not doing enough to
address the problem of child prostitution in particular.180
To gather more information and data on victim characteristics, researchers followed up with law
enforcement officials from agencies that had reported arrests or detentions in juvenile prostitution
cases. They randomly sampled these agencies and spoke with case investigators for 138 cases.
Cases were classified under three categories: third-party exploiters, solo juveniles, and child
sexual abuse (CSA) cases with payment. Most of the cases (57%) were classified as third-party
exploiters. This category involved pimps or others who profit financially from selling juveniles
for sex, and included small-time or less formal operations and well-organized criminal and
commercial enterprises, such as massage parlors. The solo juvenile category, which involved 31%
of the cases, encompassed juveniles who offered themselves for sexual services (including
pornography production), typically to people they did not know, for money or other items of
monetary value.181 This group included juveniles who lacked a stable residence and juveniles
living in a home or institution, such as a foster home. Finally, the remaining 12% of youth were
engaged in CSA with payment cases, whereby children were sexually abused by family members,
acquaintances, and caretakers and who were paid money as inducements to engage in or continue
these sexual acts. Researchers found that of the entire sample, 9 out of 10 youth were female and
177
Ibid., p. 60.
To calculate this estimate, the researchers used findings from their field research that 30% of shelter youth and 70%
of homeless youth are victims of commercial sexual exploitation. This study has been criticized because, among other
issues, the authors lack any evidence on how many of the “at risk” youth actually become involved in prostitution. In
addition, some have noted that there is duplication among the counts of “at risk” youth. Stransky and Finkelhor, How
Many Juveniles are Involved in Prostitution in the U.S.?
179
Kimberly J. Mitchell, David Finklehor, and Janis Wolak, “Conceptualizing Juvenile Prostitution as Child
Maltreatment: Findings from the National Juvenile Prostitution Study,” Child Maltreatment, vol. 15, no. 1 (February
2010),. (Hereinafter, Mitchell, Finklehor, and Wolak, “Conceptualizing Juvenile Prostitution as Child Maltreatment:
Findings from the National Juvenile Prostitution Study.”)
180
The fact that many police agencies are not actively arresting juveniles for prostitution means data related to
prostitution arrests cannot fully characterize the problem of juvenile prostitution. For a detailed discussion of this
argument, see Stansky and Finkelhor, How Many Juveniles are Involved in Prostitution in the U.S.?
181
Although police did not find evidence for a third-party exploiter, some of these youth may have been exploited by a
commercial operator.
178
Congressional Research Service
40
Sex Trafficking of Children in the United States: Overview and Issues for Congress
more than half (55%)
This text is long and has been trimmed here. Open the source document for the complete record.
This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.