OLYMPIA -- Washington lawmakers introduced legislation Monday that would require classified-advertising companies to attempt to verify the age of escorts listed in sex-related postings.
The bill was one of a dozen introduced by a bipartisan group of senators seeking to curb sex trafficking.
Sen. Jeanne Kohl-Welles, D-Seattle, said she hoped the measure would compel online clearinghouse Backpage.com to demand proof of age for those depicted in escort advertisements on its site.
"Letting minors be sold online is not right, and I don't think any reasonable person would tolerate that," said Kohl-Welles, who is sponsoring the underage sex ads bill.
The Seattle Police Department said it has linked 22 cases of child prostitution to girls who were advertised as escorts on Backpage.com, a subsidiary of Village Voice Media, which also owns Seattle Weekly. In October, Damenique Lajuan Beasley pleaded guilty to one count of promoting prostitution and one count of attempted promoting prostitution after prosecutors charged he advertised a 17-year-old girl as a sex escort on Backpage.com. He was sentenced to 31/2 in prison.
In a letter signed by more than 40 state attorneys general and sent to Backpage.com in August, the law enforcers called the site a "hub" for human trafficking and implored it to shut down its escorts section.
Backpage.com rebuffed the request, citing the federal Communications Decency Act of 1996, which ensures website operators aren't liable for the speech of unaffiliated parties.
Currently, Backpage.com asks those posting escort service ads on its website to vouch for the age of those whose services are offered. The company also works with various law enforcement agencies in weeding out suspected cases of child sex trafficking.
Village Voice Media attorney Steve Suskin said Kohl-Welles' bill would violate the 1996 federal statute, adding that the company would fight it should it be passed into law.
"This is political pandering at its finest," Suskin said.
Bruce Johnson, an attorney who is a leading scholar on the First Amendment and advertising, said the bill appears to run afoul of federal law.
The Communications Decency Act "severely hamstrings state regulation in this area," Johnson said, adding that the bill may also be at odds with the U.S. Constitution's Commerce Clause and the First Amendment.
JOIN THE DISCUSSION | Register here
We welcome comments. Please keep them civil, short and to the point. ALL CAPS, spam, obscene, profane, abusive and off topic comments will be deleted. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Thanks for taking part — and abiding by these simple rules. A thorough explanation of rules of conduct can be found in our Terms of Service. If you have any questions, including why your comment may not be showing immediately after you submit it, be sure to visit the commenting FAQ.