Sex Work

Prostitution Precrime? Monica Jones and 'Manifesting an Intent' to Prostitute in America


Support Monica Jones/Facebook

A woman waiting on a street corner. A woman in a tight dress. A woman who speaks to someone walking by, waves to a passing car, looks at you too long. Are there clear, unambiguous meanings to these things? Of course not—they could be the actions of someone selling sex, or of someone waiting for a ride, recognizing a friend, flirting, or engaging in thousands of other normal daily activities. Yet in cities and states around America, these actions can and are getting people arrested for "manifesting" prostitution.

One recent case, in Phoenix, involves Monica Jones, an Arizona State University student and sex worker rights activist. Jones was arrested last year on charges of "manifesting an intent to commit or solicit an act of prostitution," a misdemeanor crime in Phoenix that carries a minimum penalty of 15 days in jail and up to six months in jail and a $2,500 fine.

In typically myopic legislative language, Phoenix Municipal Code stipulates that a person may be guilty of manifesting prostitution if he or she is "in a public place, a place open to public view or in a motor vehicle on a public roadway and manifests an intent to commit or solicit an act of prostitution." It goes on to give some examples of what this intent may look like:

the person repeatedly beckons to, stops or attempts to stop or engage passersby in conversation or repeatedly, stops or attempts to stop, motor vehicle operators by hailing, waiving [sic] of arms or any other bodily gesture; that the person inquires whether a potential patron, procurer or prostitute is a police officer or searches for articles that would identify a police officer; or that the person requests the touching or exposure of genitals or female breast.

In May 2013, Jones made the mistake of accepting a ride from an undercover officer. The officer was part of controversial city sting operation known as Project ROSE. (I wrote about the project for an upcoming issue of Reason magazine, and about the officer heading it up as part of a recent post on sex trafficking.) Jones had spoken out against the project the night before, at a local protest, as well as posted ads on warning sex workers about the stings.

"We believe Monica was targeted by the Phoenix police department," Jaclyn Moskal-Dairman, an activist with Phoenix's Sex Worker Outreach Project, said in a 2013 conversation with Tits and Sass blogger Caty Simon. Here's Moskal-Dairman's account of what happened with Jones:

"The evening after she spoke at the protest she was walking to a bar in her neighborhood. She accepted a ride from what turned out to be an undercover cop. He began to solicit her and she warned him he that he should be careful because of the Project ROSE stings that were going on that evening. He kept propositioning her and she asked to be let out of his vehicle. He did not let her out and actually changed lanes so she couldn't exit the car.

Jones asked if the driver was a cop, ostensibly to figure out whether she was being arrested or kidnapped. And bingo: Manifesting prostitution.

SWOP Phoenix

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Arizona helped Jones challenge the charges, arguing in Phoenix Municipal Court on April 11 that Phoenix's law violates both the Arizona and U.S. Constitutions. "The charge against Jones should be dropped because the manifesting prostitution law … is unconstitutionally vague and overbroad," the ACLU said.

The ACLU also attested that the law infringes on free speech rights and "prohibits conduct that expresses gender identity." Jones says she was (and still frequently is) profiled for being a transgender woman of color. The cops stated that one of the first things that drew them to Jones was her "tight fitting black dress."

The Phoenix Municipal Court ruled against Jones last week. She was sentenced to 30 days in jail and a $500 fine.

The decision has sparked outrage on blogs and social media, with folks rightfully condemning the court's decision and Phoenix's prostitution laws and initiatives. But while Phoenix has one of the most broad statutes against manifesting prostitution—I've yet to see any other bans on "searches for articles that would identify a police officer"—many cities and even whole states still have similar laws on the books.

In eight statesNorth Carolina, California, Kentucky, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Hawaii, Ohio, and Minnesota—it's illegal to "loiter for the purpose of engaging in prostitution offense." This basically seems to mean "look to cops like a prostitute" in a public space.

Additionally, a number of cities prohibit loitering or manifesting for prostitution purposes. In Arlington, Texas, "engag(ing) in conversation with persons passing by" could get your arrested, and Dallas has a similar law (in 2013, one woman was arrested there or being "engaged in conversation in a high-prostitution area" with a man in a truck). In Portland, Oregon, "lingering in or near any street or public place" or "circling an area in a motor vehicle" suspiciously could be a crime.

New York City, of course, has laws against loitering like a prostitute—which Kate Mogulescu, a supervising attorney with the Legal Aid Society, has described as both arbitrary and discriminatory in their enforcement. In 2010, Mogulescu fought (and won) a conviction charge for a transgender woman picked up after talking to a taxi driver. "These arrests are… set up to be immune from scrutiny and, traditionally, they've been unchallenged," Mogulescu said.

Occasionally, these cases do reach the courts, with mixed results. Among the wins for the state: a 1980 case challenging a Milwaukee loitering for prostitution law; a 1985 case challenging North Carolina's statute; and a 1986 case out of Kansas City.

But judges have long been ruling such statutes unconstitutional, as well. The Supreme Court of Alaska did so back in 1978 (Brown v. Municipality of Anchorage), calling the city of Anchorage's ban on loitering for the purposes of prostitution "unconstitutionally vague." The Supreme Court of Nevada ruled similarly in 2006.

An Oklahoma judge struck down a Tulsa loitering for prostitution law in 1980 (Profit v. City of Tulsa), writing that "a person should be convicted only for what he does, not for what he is." In a 1983 decision, Judge J.J. Rossman of the Oregon Court of Appeals overturned a loitering for prostitution conviction, noting that "it is not a violation of the law merely to look like a prostitute might."

A decade later, Florida's Supreme Court found the city of Tampa's ordinance prohibiting loitering for prostitution to be unconstitutional. The court noted that it left too much up to "officers' discretion" while "implicat [ing] protected freedoms" such as "talking and waving to other people."

Yet history repeats itself: The Florida court system found itself ruling on pretty much the same thing in 2013 (West Palm Beach v. Chatman). Florida's Fourth District Court of Appeals ended up overturning a West Palm Beach ordinance, after a trans woman waiting for a ride in a "known prostitution area" was arrested.

It seems pretty clear that these laws do criminalize people merely for "look(ing) like a prostitute might," whether this determination is based on race, gender identity, or class markers. As a relatively unremarkable looking and dressing white woman, I could probably wave and holler to all the passing cars I wanted without fear. Cops are going to be more likely to assume certain invidividuals "intend to commit prostitution" and, because these laws against manifesting it are so vague, they don't have to look far to confirm their biases. Once you're suspected of being a sex worker, any manner of ordinary actions become not just probable cause but criminal behavior.

"Even assuming the government has a compelling interest in prohibiting prostitution, a measure that criminalizes a broad range of legal speech surely cannot be the 'least restrictive' means to furthering such an interest," the ACLU wrote in a memo supporting Jones' acquittal. It surely can't be—and if the law was targeting "regular" folks, there would probably be more of an uproar. But these are sex workers and trans women and other marginalized individuals we're talking about. In Arizona and many other parts of the country, restricting their freedom and rights is simply seen as good police work.

NEXT: Bloomberg Spends Big on Gun Control, Lavabit Loses Appeal, GM Wants to Bar Lawsuits: P.M. Links

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It’s funny that in Saudi Arabia, the Mutaween, or religious police, are mostly seen as a joke.

    Yet, in America, how many wouldn’t earnestly argue that a city’s police force needs a “Vice Desk”?

    1. I had a Moroccan girl friend who told me that on one trip to visit home she had been accosted by the cops for wearing blue jeans. She said he was a mounted cop and chased here into a store on horseback, knocked her down and whipped her with a whip.

      What happens here really is not all that different in a lot of cases. The reasons for it here are just as absurd as there.

      “We have to stop prostitution because it victimizes women. We will start by arresting, harassing and locking up those women”

      1. That argument of course gives away the real reason for it. Puritanism. They hate loose women because those women will tempt them into losing their religion, so to speak.

        Exactly the same as the Moroccan thug on horseback with a whip.

        1. Only our thugs are a lot more dangerous. They have guns and not much brains.

        2. They disapprove of the loose women that turned them down.

      2. The feminists who rail against prostitution, are not doing so because they think the women are being victimized. They are doing it because they think someone might be having sex, which they themselves are doomed to never have because they are so loathsome that no one can stand to be near them.

        1. well, I remember reading something about some feminists thinkers equating all heterosexual sex to rape.

          1. I wouldn’t call them “thinkers”.


            1. so…just anal then?

        2. In some cases, sure. But I think the biggest problem to those types of feminists is that it boils their blood to think that the people they hate (males not in accord with their beliefs) are found attractive by someone, and are allowed to have consensual sex. They cannot fathom that such vile creatures can offer anything to a female, so the sex they have must be due to rape culture. It is the only way to square their hate with other’s acceptance of the average white male.

          1. alot of them are lesbians as well

        3. I think it has a lot more to do with them losing power over men by being able to use sex as a tool against them. If a guy with 50 bucks in his pocket can get his needs seen to whenever he wants women can’t use his sex drive to manipulate him.

          1. That’s a very good point also.

          2. This. Can’t have the betas getting uppity and engaging in direct transfer payments for sex. No sir.

      3. I think you’re all reading too much into it. I don’t see why we shouldn’t take prohibitionists at their word: they see the dismal state of drug or sex trade, and genuinely believe they’re helping matters by sustaining the status quo.

      4. A MOROCCAN girl’s home is SAUDI ARABIA? Or are you saying they have Mutaween in Morocco?

      1. The joke is dead cause so is the link.


  2. Anybody ever visit the Torture Museum in Amsterdam? I was struck by all of the female nudity in historical depictions of torture. It seemed like the first thing they always did was strip the woman, at least to the waist.

    Stuff like this…..73×214.jpg

    was pretty typical.

    1. It is important to leave women as emotionally scarred as they are physically scarred.

      1. I think I saw a pretty convincing argument once that puritanical types actually have a more depraved imagination than average.

        1. Think S and M and the Victorians

  3. “As a relatively unremarkable looking and dressing white woman, I could probably wave and holler to all the passing cars I wanted without fear.”

    Don’t count on it, Babe! There are plenty of guys who’d fork over good money for a blow job from someone who looks like his mommy. Besides, a cop would know that he could probably get just about anything he wants from someone like you, precisely because he KNOWS you’re not a pro and won’t know how to take care of yourself. The whole point of a police state is that NOBODY is immune from being terrorized.

    1. The whole point of a police state is that NOBODY is immune from being terrorized.

      And any steps taken to avoid being terrorized is de facto admission of being a dissident — and as such worthy of terrorizing.

      1. Excellent corollary!


  4. stops or attempts to stop, motor vehicle operators by hailing, waiving [sic] of arms or any other bodily gesture;

    So, traffic cops.

    1. So how do I legally hail a cab?

      1. Uber? Oh wait, not that either.

  5. WELL, We all know Phoenix cops, especially that pompous windbag Arpaio have WAY too much spare time on their hands. Or is it they are jsut scared of REAL criminals?

    1. Anonbot makes more sensible comments than Shriek.

      1. I’m kind of impressed. The article didn’t even mention Arpaio, but the anonbot figured it out from context.

        1. anonbot is becoming self aware, the war against the machines is next.

    2. Spamming is a violation of the three laws of robotics, Anonbot.

  6. The great thing about technology is that prostitution doesn’t occur on the streets anymore. It’s all online and pretty much out of visible sight:

  7. One problem with the article: At a couple of points it mentions “sex workers” as being caught up in the dragnet. You can’t count the times the law succeeds in hitting its mark as examples of the contrary!

  8. Sexy loitering is broken windows, man. Broken windows, broken windows… Broken fucking academics with narrow-gauge conservative brains also.

    The more we can control you, citizen, the less we have to be concerned about ourselves.

  9. In Washington, D.C., from 1995-2005, prostitution was driven out of Logan Circle and points downtown along 14th Street, and many adult bookstores etc. were closed down. The yuppies, hipsters and gays who re-populated Logan Circle don’t have anything against prostitution, more often than not, just against street walkers who lower their property values, as they renovated $100,000 crack houses into $2 million condo conversions – and as they did a pro bono management consultant study (as many of them are management consultants, urban planners, etc.) and convinced Whole Foods NOT to locate its first DC store in Columbia Heights and instead open at 14th and P between Dupont Circle and Logan Circle. One tool in the gentrification kit: police stopped any woman (I don’t know that the dragnet included men), who appeared badly dressed or badly made up, near Logan Circle, and told her to either leave the neighborhood or forced her to take a black plastic trash bag and collect trash off the sidewalk. I’ve never seen a report on how many innocent gals who were just doing the walk of shame on a weekend morning in a mini-skirt and smeared eyeliner had to pick up trash.

    1. This building, 1306 O Street NW, is reported by neighbors to have been a cat house until the mid-90s, when it was condo converted:…..x=1&r=MRIS

  10. This is just disgusting and disrespectful. They should be ashamed of themselves.

  11. Reason always leaves intelligence behind. He is an admitted prostitute and he is a man. Any claim to the contrary is factually incorrect. And in any event, I bet there is a recording of the sting. Stings are common and a well reviewed and constitutional police tactic. He got a ride to a bar? How did that happen? A known prostitute flags down a car for a ride to a bar. Not very safe either.

  12. Rati, Indian goddess of sex, may “manifest” prostitution in the form of an avatar. Humans generally are not able to “manifest” anything.

  13. hai this is vinni Bangalore escort service visit our personal site if you want more information

  14. hai am jennyarora mumbai escort service
    mumbai escort service
    Mumbai Escorts

  15. hai i am priyasen Bangalore escort service

    Bangalore Escorts

    Bangalore Escorts service

  16. We Provides You Finest Bangalore Escorts Companion.Bangalore Independent escorts , the one stop place for all your desires and needs one in exceptionally exotic, enticing and hot developments which will make you desire for additional service.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.