Senate Bill S10224A

                                 
BILL NUMBER: S10224A

SPONSOR: KRUEGER
 
TITLE OF BILL:

An act to amend the penal law, in relation to closing the patron exclu-
sion in the definition of advancing prostitution and expanding the defi-
nition of patronizing a person for prostitution to include anything of
value

 
PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL:

To close two statutory gaps that prevent New York prosecutors from
charging patronizers (sex buyers) who traffic victims for their own use
under state promoting prostitution and sex trafficking statutes; and to
align New York's definition of patronizing a person for prostitution
with the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act by expanding the
definition of compensated sexual conduct to include anything of value
beyond a monetary fee.

 
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS:

              

Section 1: Establishes that this act shall be known as the Sex Traffick-
ing Accountability Act.

Section 2: Amends section 230.02 of the Penal Law, "Patronizing a person
for prostitution; definitions," by adding a definition of prostitution.

Section 3: Amends section 230.15 of the Penal Law, "Promoting prostitu-
tion; definitions of terms." Amends the definition of "advance prostitu-
tion" to stipulate that patronizers of prostitution can be charged with
promoting prostitution even if they are trafficking people to themselves
in addition to third parties. Adds a definition of "prostitution."

Section 4: Amends section 230.34-a of the penal law.

Section 5: Establishes the effective date.

 
JUSTIFICATION:

When Congress enacted the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (TVPA) in
2000, it made a deliberate choice to define a "commercial sex act" as
any sex act "on account of which anything of value is given to or
received by any person." The purchase of sexual acts is not limited to
the exchange of money. In 2015, Congress amended the TVPA's definition
of sex trafficking to make clear that purchasers of commercial sex acts
are criminally liable as perpetrators in the chain of sex trafficking.
New York's prostitution statutes were written around a simpler model:  a
pimp, a victim and a fee. The result is two gaps that leave categories
of exploitation the TVPA has covered for 25 years beyond the reach of
state law. This bill closes both and aligns New York with federal law,
which defines sex trafficking as "the recruitment, harboring, transpor-
tation, provision, obtaining, patronizing or soliciting of a person for
a commercial sex act."

The first gap runs through section 230.02, which defines patronizing
entirely in terms of a "fee." A sex buyer who provides housing, drugs,
gifts, promises of a modeling career, or other non-cash benefits in
exchange for sexual access is not, in the plain language of the statute,
patronizing a person for prostitution -- even if the exploitation is
indistinguishable from a cash transaction from the victim's perspective.
The 2000 TVPA and its reauthorizations recognize this conduct. New York
has not.

The second is deeper. Section 230.15(1) defines "advancing prostitution"
as conduct by a person acting "other than as a person in prostitution or
as a patron thereof." Because the sex trafficking statute in section
230.34 is predicated on that definition, this patron exclusion travels
into the trafficking law as well. An individual who recruits victims,
arranges their transportation, provides premises and organizes a prosti-
tution enterprise for their own sexual use and abuse cannot be charged
with sex trafficking or any promoting prostitution offense under New
York law. They are, no matter what they do, a patron. The TVPA, appro-
priately, draws no such line.

Many sex traffickers and pimps fall under this criminal liability
exemption, whereby they both traffic vulnerable persons, mostly women,
and patronize them for their own sexual use and abuse. Among the high-
visibility federal cases of sex trafficking that exactly showcase these
gaps in New York include the federal prosecutions of convicted sex
offender Jeffrey Epstein, hip-hop music mogul Sean "Diddy" Combs, CEO of
Abercrombie & Fitch Mike Jeffries, and real estate tycoons Oren, Alon,
and Tal Alexander.

Each of these accused sex traffickers used their victims for their own
use and could not be held accountable for such crimes in New York under
current law. For example, Epstein recruited women and girls, paid others
to recruit more, provided promises and orchestrated access to victims
-not just for others but for his own sexual gratification as well and
through a mix of cash, gifts, employment promises and other benefits.
Federal prosecutors reached him because the TVPA encompasses any valu-
able exchange and includes sex buyers as part of the sex trafficking
scheme. New York prosecutors could not have brought an equivalent case
under state law. Epstein was, under New York's Penal Law, a patron and
therefore beyond the reach of the state sex trafficking law. The non-
cash arrangements that defined his network -- housing, travel, modeling
contracts, drugs -- are among the most common tools traffickers use to
secure access to and sustain their abuse of power over victims at every
level, all beyond the reach of section 230.02.

The two gaps compound each other. A sex buyer who organizes non-cash
exploitation of multiple victims in New York faces neither patronizing
charges for the form of payment nor trafficking charges for the conduct
itself. Federal law covers both. New York covers neither. Under the
current administration, federal enforcement has significantly retreated,
and New York cannot count on federal intervention to make up for defi-
ciencies in its own laws. When the next Epstein, Combs or Alexander
brothers operate in New York, state law must be ready to act.

 
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY:

2026: Introduced

 
FISCAL IMPLICATIONS:

None to the state.

 
EFFECTIVE DATE:
This act shall take effect immediately.