Arizona Proposition 313 would sentence child traffickers to life in prison
ID 312861646 © Justlight | Dreamstime.com

Voters' Guide

Arizona Proposition 313 would sentence child traffickers to life in prison

Child sex trafficking is abhorrent and deserves severe punishment. But at the same time, the law has to recognize that every case is unique.

Summary 

Arizona Proposition 313 would impose a mandatory life with no possibility of release on every person convicted of any sex trafficking of a child crime. There are no exceptions, and judges do not have the discretion to override the minimums if they believe a life sentence would not be appropriate in particular cases. 

Fiscal Impact  

According to the bill, there is no anticipated fiscal impact.  

This is not credible when all convictions under the law will add many years of incarceration compared with the current penalties, and that incarceration time costs money. To illustrate, if there are 40 convictions per year and each person’s sentence is lengthened by only 17 years (the difference between the current minimum for a first offender and the current minimum for a multiple offender), multiplying that by the annual cost of incarceration in Arizona suggests a conservative estimate of increased incarceration costs to the tune of roughly $28 million each year. 

Proponents’ Arguments 

The sponsor, Rep. Selina Bliss (R-Prescott), explained the rationale for the measure. “We’re sending a strong message here in Arizona that our children are not for sale. Not now, not ever,” Bliss said. This May, a study posted by the governor’s office found that there have been 113 child victims in Arizona from 2021-2023.  

Opponents’ Arguments 

One argument offered against this measure is that it is too draconian. As written, it would subject people who were forced into trafficking to the same life sentence with no parole, with no option for the judge to lessen the sentence if they believe the defendant was forced or threatened to participate in the crime. 

Discussion 

Child sex trafficking is abhorrent and deserves severe punishment. But at the same time, the law has to recognize that every case is unique. Sex trafficking is an arena where many participants are themselves victims, forced to participate by others. So, a law with no ability for a judge to adjust the sentence if the accused is a victim or was forced to participate can create its own injustices. There were attempts in the legislature to amend this measure so it would not apply to victims who are also perpetrators, but those attempts were unsuccessful. 

Current penalties range from a minimum of 13 years for a first offense to a minimum of 30 years in prison for a third offense, reflecting that there are often complicating and mitigating factors in some cases but allowing severe punishment where merited.  

Also, consider the empirical fact that longer sentences demonstrably do not improve public safety—an imprisoned offender can’t commit a crime while in prison but is more likely to commit a crime after release. The proponents are seeking to “send a message,” but there is no evidence that increased penalties deter sex trafficking or that current punishment is inadequate.