SAN FRANCISCO — In a letter addressed to Assemblymember Maggie Krell, Anne Irwin, founder and director of Smart Justice California, expressed strong opposition to Assembly Bill 379, warning that the bill would exacerbate existing inequalities in the criminal legal system.
Smart Justice California, an advocacy group that “educates and emboldens policymakers who support meaningful criminal justice reforms that promote safety, fairness, and healthy communities,” argues that AB 379 takes a harmful and outdated approach to addressing sex trafficking.
The bill, if enacted, would create a new crime for loitering with the intent to purchase sex and would increase penalties for solicitation involving individuals who are 16 or 17 years old. According to Irwin’s letter, such measures risk “unintended consequences that would impact older teens, people of color, and the LGBTQ community.”
While the organization affirms its support for efforts to combat human trafficking and expand services for survivors—including through initiatives like the Human Trafficking Victims Assistance Program and increased federal funding under the Victims of Crime Act—it maintains that AB 379 “relies on ineffective, harmful, and historically discriminatory approaches that undermine the rights and safety of the very individuals it claims to protect.”
Smart Justice California contends that anti-loitering and solicitation statutes like those proposed in AB 379 have long been used disproportionately against marginalized groups. “These laws have been used to stop, harass, and arrest people—particularly Black and Brown women, transgender individuals, and those perceived to be engaged in sex work—based not on evidence of criminal activity, but on profiling and discriminatory assumptions,” the letter states.
The group further emphasizes that solicitation laws have historically been used to police the sexual activity of gay men and warns that AB 379’s vague definition of “intent” could lead to more biased policing and further trauma for survivors.
The organization also notes that AB 379 attempts to reverse recent legislative reforms. “Specifically, AB 379 attempts to undo key amendments enacted just last year, which ensured that young people would not be subjected to felony prosecutions and punishments for engaging in consensual relationships with other young people,” Irwin wrote.
A central provision of AB 379 would increase penalties for solicitation involving a 16- or 17-year-old. Smart Justice California acknowledges that cases involving exploited minors should carry serious consequences but argues that existing law—specifically SB 1414—already addresses such concerns with a more balanced and thoughtful approach.
“SB 1414 strikes a careful balance,” Irwin concluded, “and AB 379 would undo that progress, reinstating a broad criminalization approach that will only punish more young people.”
