Free Press

Alabama Bans Publishing of Prostitution Mugshots, Allows Cops to Hold Suspected Sex Workers for 72 Hours

Constitutional violations abound in Alabama "Human Trafficking Safe Harbor Act."

|

modified mugshots

Under a little-heralded new Alabama rule, it's illegal to publish the mugshots of people arrested for prostitution. Alabama law now stipulates that these mugshots are "not a public record and may not be published in any printed or electronic media or provided to any person" without special permission from a district judge. "We're trying to look at these women less as criminals and more as victims, and we don't want to see them be revictimized," said Rep. Jack Williams (R-Birmingham), who sponsored the legislation.

I've railed many times against the journalistic practice of publishing the mugshots of people arrested for prostitution or solicitation of prostitution. Considering the stigma surrounding prostitution, I think any "public interest" served in seeing the faces of those merely arrested for this misdemeanor offense is generally outweighed by the long-term damage it could do—especially in the Internet era—to the the lives and reputations of these individuals. But the decision whether to publish prostitution mugshots, or any mugshots, should be matter of journalistic ethics, not government mandate.

If Alabama lawmakers really believe that all people selling sex are victims, perhaps they should repeal laws that make selling sex a crime. But as long as prostitution is a crime in Alabama, there's no justifying a categorical ban on publishing prostitution-arrest mugshots. As Alabama Press Association lawyer Dennis Bailey said, "It's a very blatant form of prior restraint," which is unconstitutional.

What's especially strange here is that law passed the state legislature in May and took effect August 1, but newspaper editors say they are just hearing about the measure now. This seems like a pretty big oversight on both the part of state officials and Alabama journalists, who covered the legislation that the mugshot-ban was part of but apparently failed to notice that particular part. Meanwhile, officials failed to specify what, if any, punishment could come from violating the ban.

The main focus of the legislation, known as the Alabama Human Trafficking Safe-Harbor Act, was allowing law-enforcement to decline criminal charges for minors engaged in prostitution, and instead refer them to social services or state custody. Alabama police arrested three minors for prostitution in 2015, according to the Anniston Star, which reviewed statewide arrest data. "It's unclear whether any of the children were actually charged with the crime," the paper reported, "or whether police knew they were underage at the time of the arrest."

Not charging juveniles for selling sex, whether on their own or under force or coercion, is certainly a positive step. But the legislation contains a lot of language that suggests, arrest or no arrest, these young people aren't simply being seen as victims. For instance: "Once the sexually exploited child is adjudicated, the juvenile court shall retain jurisdiction over the sexually exploited child and may enforce prior orders requiring payment of court-ordered monies."

Beyond that, the "Safe Harbor Act" is packed with worrying components unrelated to minors, in addition to the mugshot ban. Most alarmingly, it allows adults arrested for prostitution to be held for up to 72 hours so law-enforcement can screen them for mental-health issues, financial status, living arrangements, and who knows what else, before deciding whether to bring charges or send them to a pre-trial diversion program. Here's the relevant passage:

For the safety and well-being of a person arrested for the crime of prostitution under Division 2, Article 3, Chapter 12, Title 13A, Code of Alabama 1975, he or she may be held in custody for up to 72 hours. The person shall be brought before a court of competent jurisdiction as soon as possible within a 48-hour period to conduct an inquiry into the person's access to resources, such as, but not limited to, health care, shelter, mental health counseling, or financial aid. The court may issue an order to assist the person in obtaining the services and resources needed pursuant to the court's inquiry.

In addition, all prostitution cases must now be heard in district, rather than muncipal, courts.

The new law also requires any "business engaging in an escort business of companionship" to register with the Alabama secretary of state's office, and sets a criminal penalty for failing to do so. The office is urging people to report any unregistered escort-services they know of to the the Alabama Law Enforcement Agency. What's dangerous here is it may relieve police of the need to prove prostitution of individuals advertising as "escorts" before making an arrest.

Rep. Williams has described the bill his efforts as a first step toward "plant[ing] a flag that says you are not going to rape a child in Alabama." The measure passed both the Alabama House and Senate unanimously.

The last major sections of Williams' bill focus on prostitution clients, and civil asset forfeiture. It stipulates that anyone found guilty of soliciting prostitution or promoting it, among a few related offenses, must be tried in district rather than municipal court and assessed a mandatory fine of $500, "notwithstanding any other fines, restitution, court costs, or docket fees," with the fine rising 50 percent for second through fourth convictions. The money will go to a "court-certified therapeutic counseling entity that provides education, treatment, and prevention counseling to adult persons convicted of prostitution offenses." And courts may order those convicted of solicitation to "attend counseling or an educational training program designed to reduce recidivism rates."

Alabama cops were also granted more to seize the assets of anyone suspected of soliciting prostitution. "We've added wording so it's plain that if a john pulls up to a car, solicits a female, puts her in that car and drives off—that car can be forfeited, just like a drug dealer's," said state prosecutor Barry Matson, deputy director of the Alabama District Attorneys Association, at an Alabama Human Trafficking Task Force meeting in February. He illustrated this detail by noting that, "Right now in Alabama if I pull up on the road and shoot a deer… I'm going to lose my car and my gun. So I think if we can protect deer in that way we darn sure can protect people."

The forfeiture expansion goes beyond cars and "johns," however. Under the Safe Harbor Act, "any property, proceeds, or instrumentality of every kind, used or intended for use in the course of, derived from, or realized through the commission" of any misdemeanor or felony prostitution offense, or "attempt or conspiracy to commit such offenses," is subject to civil forfeiture. This makes prostitution offenses the only misdemeanor crimes subject to this sort of broad forfeiture potential in Alabama.

NEXT: How Much Credit Should Obama Get for Shrinking the Federal Prison Population?

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 Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I think they’re going to do more than hold them

    1. The question that came to my mind was can they fuck ’em too.

    2. Just a gentle cusping.

  2. I’ve always found publishing mugshots of unconvicted people with any misdemeanor by the local news at the very least unneighborly.

    1. Yep. So they’ll publish the name and picture of someone accused of, say, groping, and hide the victim, but if it turns out the case is bogus, the damage has been done.

    2. What is ‘odd’ here is the law is directed at publishers, rather than the source of every mug shot, law enforcement. The State has a wee bit more direct control of the cops.

  3. The 72 hours is just another threat the pigs can hold over their heads for freebies.

    1. Oh C’mon JB, these people are suspected.

  4. “The measure passed both the Alabama House and Senate unanimously.”

    This is always a bad sign.

  5. We’re trying to look at these women less as criminals and more as victims…

    But not so much that we stop them from having mugshots in the first place. Look, law enforcement loves easy and risk free policing, and legislators love moralizing. This is their bread and butter and they’re not giving this up any time soon. The only reason they’re even playing up the angle that sex workers lack agency is so that they can place undue emphasis and put a stupefying amount of public resources into these safe, easy and moral anti-prostitution efforts.

  6. Are mugshots and names for accused prostitutes, pimps, and johns public record? Ditto rape accusers and accused?

    If so, there shouldn’t be bar to publication.

  7. OTOH, although it is clearly a prior restraint to ban the publication of mugshots once they are released by the government or otherwise obtained by the press, The publication and distribution of an unflattering photograph of anyone accused of a crime, who is presumed to be innocent as a matter of law, is grossly unfair and is a blatant attempt by the prosecution to prejudice potential jurors against the descendent I am pleasantly publicizing the notion of his or her guilt. Ditto for press conferences called by prosecutors to proclaim the guilt of a suspect who is presumed to be innocent.

    Photograph should be allowed only for suspects who have escaped custody or who are at large. Otherwise, journalist should be smart enough not to allow themselves to be used as tools for prosecution propaganda. Indeed, after the Central Park jogger case and the Duke lacrosse case, you would think that the media would have learned their lesson about taking prosecution statements at face value.

    1. >Ditto for press conferences called by prosecutors to proclaim the guilt of a suspect who is presumed to be innocent never even tried.

      A la Giuliani.

    2. Oh jeez. I just re-read my post. The voice dictation function on my iPad sucks. I didn’t proofread. I apologize for the word salad.

  8. Reason should have a “duh” tag for articles we can all sit around agreeing with each other about.

  9. “journalistic ethics”

    So hen’s teeth?

    I’m exaggerating. There are notable exceptions.

  10. Any law vs. shooting deer at the roadside isn’t to protect deer, it’s to protect people from bullets. Simply killing the deer by safe means would help protect motorists.

  11. Hmm. Is this really a protective act, or did they do this so that sting operations are more successful?

    I doubt that they’ve been publishing pictures of their own undercover cops, so wouldn’t it make sense for johns to use mugshots to verify that they’re getting the real thing rather than an arrest?

  12. If the media publishes the name and/or photo of an arrested person, then fails to provide an update to their article whenever charges are dismissed or the person is acquitted, that should be considered the same as accusing the person of the crime for libel purposes.

    1. In such cases, the media better hope the person *is* guilty, or else they may have to cough up some money.

  13. So, basically, they’re moving toward the “Nordic” model of prostitution?

    Explain to me why I, as a man, should support this? Why should I support the selective acknowledgement of other people’s rights but not mine? If other people are happy to hold my rights hostage to get me to support their agendas, why should I not reciprocate?

    Fuck em. Either legalize prostitution on both sides or not at all. That’s my position.

  14. Work oppertunity: Start your work at home right now. Spend more time with your family and earn. Start bringing 85USD/hr just on a laptop. Very easy way to make your life happy and earning continuously.last week my check was 24551USD pop over here this site

    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://JobNews80.com

  15. just as Bryan said I’m shocked that a student able to profit $7511 in 4 weeks on the computer . check this site out>>>>>>>>>>> http://bit.ly/2g9UUPL

  16. My first job out of High School was at St Paul and over the next 5 years Iearned so very much. Seeing the hospital torn down tears a small piece of my heart out. The Daughters of Charity and the doctors and staff of St Paul Hospital will always be with me..???????
    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.homejobs7.com

  17. added wording so it’s plain that if a john pulls up to a car, solicits a female, puts her in that car and drives off

    I just don’t get why anyone picks up a hooker on the street in this age of internet commerce.

    -jcr

  18. The best part of work is from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week. Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more info Check the following link

    ==================> http://www.homejobs7.com

  19. Paying for sex is illegal? Holy shit wtf am I going to do with my wife?

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.