BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    Ó





                              SENATE JUDICIARY COMMITTEE
                         Senator Hannah-Beth Jackson, Chair
                             2015-2016  Regular  Session


          AB 1684 (Mark Stone)
          Version: March 17, 2016
          Hearing Date: June 14, 2016 
          Fiscal: Yes
          Urgency: No
          RD   


                                        SUBJECT
                                           
                          Civil actions:  human trafficking

                                      DESCRIPTION 

          This bill, independent of any other remedy or procedure that  
          might apply, would provide the Department of Fair Employment and  
          Housing (DFEH) with the authority to receive, investigate,  
          conciliate, mediate, and prosecute human trafficking complaints  
          on behalf of a human trafficking victim, as specified.  Damages  
          awarded in any such DFEH action shall be awarded to the person  
          harmed by the violation of human trafficking, as specified, but  
          costs and attorney's fees awarded in any such action shall be  
          awarded to the DFEH. 

                                      BACKGROUND  

          In 2005, AB 22 (Lieber, Keuhl and Liu, Ch. 240, Stats. 2005)  
          enacted the California Trafficking Victims Protection Act,  
          explicitly rendering human trafficking a felony in this state  
          and adding a new civil rights statute to grant human trafficking  
          victims a longer statute of limitations period than other  
          victims of civil rights crimes to bring their claims due to the  
          special circumstances faced by those victims. (See Pen. Code  
          Sec. 236.1 and Civ. Code Sec. 52.5.)  Specifically, the  
          resulting statute, as amended by subsequent legislation, permits  
          a victim of human trafficking to bring a civil action to recover  
          actual damages, compensatory damages, punitive damages,  
          injunctive relief, any combination of those, or any other  
          appropriate relief, and sets the statute of limitations for  
          bringing such claims within seven years of the date on which the  








          AB 1684 (Mark Stone)
          Page 2 of ? 

          trafficking victim was freed from the trafficking situation.   
          Moreover, if the victim was a minor when the act of human  
          trafficking against the victim occurred, the statute of  
          limitations is extended to ten years after the date the  
          plaintiff attains the age of majority. (Civ. Code Sec. 52.5(c).)  
            

          This bill seeks to allow the Department of Fair Employment and  
          Housing to receive, investigate, and prosecute claims that may  
          be brought under the state's Trafficking Victims Protection Act  
          on behalf of victims of human trafficking, as specified.

                                CHANGES TO EXISTING LAW
           
           Existing law  provides that any person who deprives or violates  
          the personal liberty of another is guilty of human trafficking  
          if the person has the intent to: (1) effect or maintain  
          specified felony prostitution-related offenses; (2) commit  
          extortion, (3) use a minor to produce or distribute obscene  
          material or child pornography; or (4) obtain forced labor or  
          services.  Existing law provides for various specified fines and  
          imprisonment for the crime of human trafficking.  (Pen. Code  
          Sec. 236.1(a)-(c).)
           
          Existing law  provides for various civil actions based on  
          violations of a person's civil or personal rights, including the  
          Unruh Civil Rights Act, the Ralph Civil Rights Act, and the  
          California Trafficking Victims Protection Act, among others.   
          (Civ. Code Sec. 51-51.9.)  

           Existing law  , the California Trafficking Victims Protection Act,  
          authorizes a victim of human trafficking to bring a civil action  
          for actual damages, compensatory damages, punitive damages,  
          injunctive relief, any combination of those, or any other  
          appropriate relief.  A prevailing plaintiff may also be awarded  
          reasonable attorney's fees and litigation costs including, but  
          not limited to, expert witness fees and expenses as part of the  
          costs. (Civ. Code Sec. 52.5(a), (f).)  

           Existing law  requires such actions to be brought within seven  
          years of the date on which the trafficking victim was freed from  
          the trafficking situation, or if the victim was a minor when the  
          act of human trafficking against the victim occurred, within 10  
          years after the date the plaintiff attains the age of majority.   
          (Civ. Code Sec. 52.5(c).)  Existing law provides for the stay of  







          AB 1684 (Mark Stone)
          Page 3 of ? 

          these actions and the tolling of the statute of limitations for  
          these actions under specified circumstances. (Civ. Code Sec.  
          52.5(d), (e), (h).)  

           Existing law  provides that whoever denies, aids or incites a  
          denial, or makes any discrimination or distinction contrary to  
          specified civil and personal rights is liable for each and every  
          offense for the actual damages, and any amount that may be  
          determined by a jury, or a court sitting without a jury, up to a  
          maximum of three times the amount of actual damage but in no  
          case less than four thousand dollars ($4,000), and any  
          attorney's fees that may be determined by the court in addition  
          thereto.  (Civ. Code Sec. 52(a).) 

           Existing law  provides, in relevant part, that whoever denies a  
          right provided by Section 51.7 (the Ralph Civil Rights Act), or  
          aids, incites, or conspires in that denial, is liable for each  
          and every offense for the actual damages suffered by any person  
          denied that right and, in addition, the following:
           an amount to be determined by a jury, or a court sitting  
            without a jury, for exemplary damages;
           a civil penalty of $25,000 to be awarded to the person denied  
            the right provided by the Ralph Civil Rights Act in any action  
            brought by the person denied the right, or by the Attorney  
            General, a district attorney, or a city attorney; and 
           attorney's fees as may be determined by the court.  (Civ. Code  
            Sec. 52(b)(1)-(3).) 

           Existing law  provides that whenever there is reasonable cause to  
          believe that any person or group of persons is engaged in  
          conduct of resistance to the full enjoyment of any civil or  
          personal rights, as specified, and that conduct is of that  
          nature and is intended to deny the full exercise of those  
          rights, the Attorney General, any district attorney or city  
          attorney, or any person aggrieved by the conduct, may bring a  
          civil action in the appropriate court by filing with it a  
          complaint. (Civ. Code Sec. 52(c).) 

           Existing law  provides that actions brought pursuant to the above  
          provisions are independent of any other actions, remedies, or  
          procedures that may be available to an aggrieved party pursuant  
          to any other law.  (Civ. Code Sec. 52(e).)

           Existing law  specifies the functions, powers, and duties of the  
          Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH), which include,  







          AB 1684 (Mark Stone)
          Page 4 of ? 

          among other things, to receive, investigate, conciliate,  
          mediate, and prosecute complaints alleging practices made  
          unlawful pursuant to the Fair Employment and Housing Act and  
          other specified nondiscrimination or personal and civil rights  
          laws, including the Unruh Civil Rights Act (prohibiting  
          discrimination on the basis of certain characteristics in  
          business practices) and the Ralph Civil Rights Act (relating to  
          the right to be free from hate violence based on certain  
          characteristics), among others.  (Gov. Code Sec. 12930(f).)

           This bill  would further authorize the DFEH to receive,  
          investigate, conciliate, mediate, and prosecute complaints  
          alleging human trafficking, and bring civil actions for, a  
          victim of human trafficking, as described above.  This bill  
          would specify that any damages awarded in any action brought by  
          the DFEH pursuant to the California Trafficking Victims  
          Protection Act shall be awarded to the person harmed by the  
          violation of Section 236.1 of the Penal Code (making human  
          trafficking a felony), above.  This bill would specify that  
          costs and attorney's fees awarded in such an action shall be  
          awarded to the department and that these remedies and procedures  
          shall be independent of any other remedy or procedure that might  
          apply.                                       

                                        COMMENT
           
          1.   Stated need for the bill  

          According to the author, "existing law already allows a victim  
          of human trafficking to bring a civil action against the  
          perpetrator.  However, this statute has rarely if ever been  
          used.  Victims of human trafficking lack the resources and  
          information to make use of their right to bring an action and  
          receive compensation for harm suffered.  This bill would allow  
          DFEH to bring an action on the victim's behalf and award damages  
          and penalties to the victim." 

          2.    Human trafficking persists in California despite  
            improvements made by AB 22's anti-trafficking laws  

          As noted in the Background, in 2005, California passed  
          groundbreaking anti-trafficking legislation, AB 22 (Lieber,  
          Keuhl and Liu, Ch. 240, Stats. 2005), to take a comprehensive  
          approach to the human trafficking problem by, among other  
          things: (1) expressly defining and establishing human  







          AB 1684 (Mark Stone)
          Page 5 of ? 

          trafficking as a felony under California law; (2) adding a new  
          civil cause of action for victims which recognized the  
          circumstances unique to those victims by allowing for extended  
          statutes of limitations as well as the ability to recover costs  
          and attorneys' fees, and; (3) establishing a task force to study  
          various issues in connection with human trafficking and to  
          advise the Legislature on or before July 1, 2007.  In 2012,  
          Attorney General (AG) created a Human Trafficking Work Group to  
          examine the current nature and scope of human trafficking in  
          California, evaluate the state's progress in combating human  
          trafficking, and identify challenges and opportunities in  
          protecting and assisting victims and bringing traffickers to  
          justice. The work group found that, "California has made  
          tremendous progress in combating human trafficking [ . . . ] but  
          significant new challenges in combating this crime have emerged  
          in the last five years." (Office of the AG, The State of Human  
          Trafficking in California (2012)  
           [as of May 16, 2016], pp. 3-4.)  

          According to the AG's report, human trafficking "is a crime  
          perpetrated against men, women, and children of every  
          nationality and socioeconomic status. Human trafficking is a  
          low-risk, high-profit business - an estimated $32 billion-a-year  
          global industry that has recently attracted the participation of  
          increasingly sophisticated, organized criminal gangs. Domestic  
          street gangs set aside traditional rivalries to set up  
          commercial sex rings and maximize profits from the sale of young  
          women. Transnational gangs use cross-border tunnels to move not  
          only guns and drugs, but also human beings, from Mexico into  
          California. The Internet and new technologies have also  
          transformed the landscape of human trafficking. Traffickers use  
          social media and other online tools to recruit victims and, in  
          the case of sex trafficking, find and communicate with  
          customers."  (Id. at 5.)  The report found, among other things,  
          that: 
           from mid-2010 to mid-2012, California's nine regional human  
            trafficking task forces identified 1,277 victims, initiated  
            2,552 investigations, and arrested 1,798 individuals; 
           labor trafficking is under-reported and under-investigated as  
            compared to sex trafficking;
           local and transnational gangs are increasingly trafficking in  
            human beings because it is a low-risk and high, renewable  
            profit crime.  (Id. at 4.)  








          AB 1684 (Mark Stone)
          Page 6 of ? 

          Recognizing that human trafficking, by its nature, presents  
          significant obstacles to those who seek to protect and assist  
          victims, the AG's report recommended a continuation of the  
          victim-centered approach that has already started to take hold  
          in California. While this approach really begins with training  
          law enforcement, first responders, and non-traditional first  
          identifiers on how to recognize and respond to human  
          trafficking, it is also important that victims are aware of and  
          have access to critical services to meet their immediate safety,  
          health, and housing needs. (Id. at 9-10.)  Understandably,  
          though AB 22 created an avenue for victims of human trafficking  
          to be able to seek redress in civil court and provided longer  
          statute of limitations to do so in recognition of the particular  
          circumstances that human trafficking victims face, these victims  
          seemingly still struggle to bring their civil actions on their  
          own behalf.  Unfortunately, while other personal or civil rights  
          statutes expressly authorize the Attorney General and the  
          Department of Fair Employment and Housing (DFEH) to bring civil  
          claims on behalf of victims, there is no public enforcement  
          mechanism of this anti-trafficking statute.  This bill would  
          provide that public enforcement mechanism.

          3.    Authority granted to Department of Fair Employment and  
            Housing to bring civil actions relating to human trafficking  
            violations  

          Under existing law, the DFEH has the authority to bring claims  
          enforcing various civil and personal rights statutes, as well as  
          anti-discrimination laws.  These statutes include the Unruh  
          Civil Rights Act (involving discrimination on the bases of  
          protected characteristics by businesses) and the Ralph Civil  
          Rights Act (involving hate crimes).  This bill would now  
          authorize the DFEH to also bring civil actions under the  
          California Trafficking Victims Protection Act on behalf of  
          victims of human trafficking.  In doing so, this bill would help  
          provide a comprehensive approach to the investigation and  
          enforcement of the various personal and civil rights protected  
          under California law. In support of the bill, the Consumer  
          Attorneys of California writes: 

            It has been over ten years since California adopted a  
            comprehensive approach to human trafficking.  AB 22 (Chapter  
            240, Stats. of 2005) created a human trafficking task force,  
            added a chapter to the Penal Code defining the crime of human  
            trafficking and providing penalties, and created a civil cause  







          AB 1684 (Mark Stone)
          Page 7 of ? 

            of action for victims of human trafficking.  In 2012, Attorney  
            General Kamala Harris convened a working group to reassess  
            human trafficking in our state.  The working group's final  
            report noted [that] in "just two years of reporting,  
            California's nine regional anti-trafficking task forces  
            initiated over 2,500 investigations, identified almost 1,300  
            victims of human trafficking, and arrested almost 1,800  
            individuals."  Despite those actions, the report concluded  
            that human trafficking continues to be "a substantial problem  
            facing California" and, in some ways, has become worse due to  
            the increasing role played by transnational and domestic  
            criminal networks.  This bill seeks to address the problem by  
            effectively authorizing [. . . ] the Department of Fair  
            Employment and Housing to bring a civil action on the victim's  
            behalf.  Although existing law allows victims to bring civil  
            actions against perpetrators for actual and punitive damages,  
            many victims lack resources to bring an action.  This bill  
            would allow public authorities to bring actions and award  
            damages to victims."  

          4.    Attorney's fees  

          Under existing law, any person who violates the personal or  
          civil rights of another person, as specified, is liable for  
          attorney's fees as may be determined by the court.  In some  
          cases, those fees are recoverable by the victim who brings an  
          action for violations of their civil or personal rights; in  
          others, they could be recovered by the Attorney General or  
          district attorney when bringing claims as they are authorized to  
          do so under these various statutes. (See Civ. Code Sec. 52(a),  
          (c).)  Moreover, under the California Trafficking Victims  
          Protection Act itself, a prevailing plaintiff can currently be  
          awarded reasonable attorney's fees and litigation costs. (See  
          Civ. Code Sec. 52.5(f).)  This bill would now require that any  
          costs and attorney's fees awarded by the court in an action  
          brought by the DFEH under the California Trafficking Victims  
          Protection Act be awarded to the DFEH.  In doing so, this bill  
          would be consistent with existing public policy allowing  
          recovery of attorney's fees by the party bringing the action. 


           Support  :  Consumer Attorneys of California

           Opposition  :  None Known 








          AB 1684 (Mark Stone)
          Page 8 of ? 

                                        HISTORY
           
           Source  :  Author 

           Related Pending Legislation  :


          SB 1334 (Stone, 2016) would add human trafficking to the lists  
          of forms of conduct that constitute "assaultive and abusive  
          conduct" for purposes of a health practitioner's reporting  
          requirements.  

          AB 2513 (Williams, 2016) would allow a court to consider and  
          take into account as an aggravating factor, for sentencing  
          purposes, a criminal defendant's participation in human  
          trafficking, as specified. This bill is currently in the Senate  
          Public Safety Committee. 

          AB 2498 (Bonta, 2016) would allow the names and other personal  
          information of a human trafficking victim, or the victim's  
          family, to be exempted from disclosure pursuant to a public  
          records request. This bill is set to be heard in this Committee  
          on the same day as this bill.

          AB 2202 (Baker, 2016) would establish within the Office of  
          Emergency Services a program of financial and technical  
          assistance for district attorney offices that employ a "vertical  
          prosecution methodology" in human trafficking prosecutions, as  
          specified. This bill was held on the suspense file in the  
          Assembly Appropriations Committee.

          AB 2027 (Quirk, 2016) would require specified state or local  
          officials to certify the cooperation of a victim of human  
          trafficking in an investigation or prosecution of those  
          trafficking crimes, when the victim is, has been, or is likely  
          to be, cooperative, as specified, and the victim or the victim's  
          family requests such certification on his or her application for  
          a special "T" visa to temporarily remain in the U.S.  This bill  
          is currently in the Senate Rules Committee. 

          AB 1942 (Garcia, 2016) would require a hotel or motel that  
          provides lodging services in the state to train employees who  
          are likely to interact or come into contact with victims of  
          human trafficking in recognizing the signs of human trafficking  
          and how to report those signs to the appropriate law enforcement  







          AB 1684 (Mark Stone)
          Page 9 of ? 

          agency, as specified. The bill would require the Department of  
          Justice to develop guidelines for the training and to post them  
          on its Internet Web site. This bill was held on the suspense  
          file in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

          AB 1762 (Campos, 2016) would allow a victim of human trafficking  
          to apply to the court to vacate any conviction for a nonviolent  
          crime that was committed while that individual was a victim of  
          human trafficking. The bill would also allow an individual  
          adjudicated a ward of the juvenile court as the result of a  
          nonviolent crime committed while he or she was a human  
          trafficking victim to apply to have the petition dismissed. This  
          bill is currently in the Senate Rules Committee.

          AB 1761 (Weber, 2016) would establish an affirmative defense  
          against a charge of a crime that the person was coerced to  
          commit as a direct result of being a human trafficking victim  
          (e.g. prostitution) and when the person had reasonable fear of  
          harm. This bill would not apply to charges involving a serious  
          or violent crime, as specified, or a charge of human  
          trafficking.  This bill is currently in the Senate Public Safety  
          Committee. 

          AB 1760 (Santiago, 2016) would require a peace officer to  
          determine whether a suspect of a crime is a minor who is a human  
          trafficking victim, and whether any other crime that person is  
          suspected of was committed as a direct result of being  
          trafficked. The bill would require the peace officer to take  
          specified steps, including that the officer make a record of  
          this determination and provide the district attorney with the  
          record for an independent review. This bill was held on the  
          suspense file in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

          AB 1731 (Atkins, 2016) would establish a statewide Interagency  
          Human Trafficking Task Force to: (1) gather statewide data on  
          sex and labor traffickers, sex buyers, and human trafficking  
          victims; (2) recommend interagency protocols and best practices  
          for training and outreach to law enforcement, victim service  
          providers, and other state and private sector employees likely  
          to encounter sex trafficking; and, (3) evaluate and implement  
          approaches to increase public awareness about human trafficking.  
           This bill is in the Senate Rules Committee.  

          AB 1595 (Campos, 2016) would require a private or public  
          employer that provides mass transportation services, as  







          AB 1684 (Mark Stone)
          Page 10 of ? 

          specified, in the state to train its employees, who are likely  
          to interact or come into contact with victims of human  
          trafficking, in recognizing the signs of human trafficking and  
          how to report those signs to the appropriate law enforcement  
          agency. The bill would require the Department of Justice to  
          develop guidelines for the training, including, but not limited  
          to, guidance on how to report human trafficking.  This bill was  
          held on the suspense file in the Assembly Appropriations  
          Committee.

          AB 1276 (Santiago, 2016) would authorize, under specified  
          conditions, a minor 17 years of age or younger to testify by  
          contemporaneous examination and cross-examination in another  
          place and out of the presence of the judge, jury, defendant or  
          defendants, and attorneys if the testimony will involve the  
          recitation of the facts of an alleged offense of human  
          trafficking, if the court makes certain findings. This bill is  
          currently in the Senate Public Safety Committee.  

           Prior Legislation  :

          AB 15 (Holden, Ch. 474, Stats. 2015), among other things,  
          extended the statute of limitations for victims of human  
          trafficking to bring a civil action under Section 51.5 from five  
          to seven years, and, in the case of minors, from eight to 10  
          years after the plaintiff attains the age of majority.  

          AB 22 (Lieber, Keuhl and Liu, Ch. 240, Stats. 2005), See  
          Background.

           Prior Vote  :

          Assembly Floor (Ayes 76, Noes 0)
          Assembly Appropriations Committee (Ayes 18, Noes 0)
          Assembly Judiciary Committee (Ayes 8, Noes 0)

                                   **************