Court backs law tying AIDS funds to anti-prostitution policy
- Mar 2, 2007 - comment
A federal appeals court has handed a victory to the U.S. government in its efforts to combat both HIV/AIDS and sexual trafficking.
A three-judge panel of the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals ruled unanimously Feb. 27 that the federal government can require recipients of HIV/AIDS relief grants to oppose prostitution and sex trafficking. The decision reversed a federal judge’s opinion that the law violated the free-speech rights of aid grantees.
Rep. Chris Smith, R.-N.J., applauded the ruling, describing it as a “common-sense decision that clearly reaffirms that the government has a right to define” its policy goals.
“While organizations should not be compelled to advocate for the government, the government should also not be forced to give taxpayer money to those who are actively working against the policy of the U.S. government,” Smith said in a written statement. Smith sponsored the amendment to a 2003 law that required grant recipients to have an anti-prostitution policy.
“To say you are opposed to the global spread of HIV/AIDS but not the global sex trade industry is not only counterproductive to the fight against HIV/AIDS, it is detrimental to U.S. efforts to end the heinous crime of human trafficking,” he said. “Above all, sex trafficking and prostitution degrades and exploits women and young girls.”
DKT International challenged the law because it does not have a policy in favor of or opposed to prostitution and sexual slavery. DKT argued that the government’s requirement restricts its First Amendment rights and mandates it communicate a message with which it may not agree.
The government’s requirement, however, “does not violate the First Amendment,” Judge A. Raymond Randolph wrote for the D.C. Appeals Court panel. “The act does not compel DKT to advocate the government’s position on prostitution and sex trafficking; it requires only that if DKT wishes to receive funds it must communicate the message the government chooses to fund.”
The federal government’s “official position” is that eliminating sex trafficking and prostitution “is an integral part of the worldwide fight against HIV/AIDS,” Randolph said in his 10-page opinion. One of the ways of achieving its goal of eradicating HIV/AIDS is for the U.S “to speak out against legalizing prostitution in other countries,” he said.
Under Supreme Court precedent, the government “may hire private agents to speak for it” and “require those agents not convey contrary messages,” Randolph wrote. “We think it follows that in choosing its agents, the government may use criteria to ensure that its message is conveyed in an efficient and effective fashion.”
DKT could retain its neutral policy on prostitution and establish a subsidiary that would receive funds by endorsing the government’s anti-sex trafficking policy, Randolph said.
Smith said neither the law nor the court ruling bars aid recipients “from reaching out and helping prostitutes in matters related to HIV/AIDS. It simply prevents funds from going to organizations that do not have a policy explicitly opposing sex trafficking and prostitution.”
The case is DTK International v. U.S. Agency for International Development.
There are about 600,000 to 800,000 men, women and children trafficked across international borders each year, according to the State Department’s 2006 Trafficking in Persons report. This does not include millions of victims who are trafficked within their own national borders, the report said. About 80 percent of the transnational victims are women and girls, and as much as 50 percent are minors. The data show the majority of these are victims of sexual trafficking.
It is estimated as many as 17,500 people are trafficked into the United States each year.
Further Learning
Learn more about: Family, Sexual Purity, Citizenship, Human Rights, National, Religious Liberty