and don't know what else.  
Anyone with any suggestions on what else?

are the two main places to look, aside from the big pay sites of WestLaw.
FindLaw has the federal appellate court decisions.
It is instructive to pull up every US Court of Appeals case with the word "prostitution" in it.
Those show the kinds of cases being prosecuted recently.
Perhaps most importantly they show the kinds of evidence being used by federal prosecutors, such as credit card receipts, ATM records, phone records, hotel records, etc, and also schlong prints!

Of course the material would make much more sense if you went to law school and practiced in the federal litigation field for five years or so.
Trying to self-educate with law is a lot like self-medicating with medicine or even doing surgery on one's self.

Maybe your community has an expert on defense of federal white collar crime. That is the niche, and the sub-niches are defense of prostitution and obscenity cases.
Of course, we can expect the feds to prosecute more escort cases now after TBD and the two big federal cases in Miami recently.
The federal file in the latest Miami case involving "The Circuit" would be very informative to study.
Who knows what is next with the current administration.

That's a good example of an overgeneralization that is both not generally true and not particularly informative.
The statutes are controlling nationally and cases must follow their wording.
However, the cases are limited to their particular jurisdictional venues, districts, or States. One US Court of Appeals may interpret a statute differently from another.
Thus you have the so-called conservative Fourth Circuit that often reaches results different from the liberal Ninth Circuit US Court of Appeals.
Cases are more interesting for sure, but much more limited in scope than the national statutes.
Now tell us all you know about brain surgery.LOL - ribbing intended!

I'm not a specialist however.

The relevant criminal statutes are located in Title 18 of the US Code.  A version and federal caselaw are located here on the Cornell Law website which I think is a little easier to search than findlaw.

Federal Law:  http://www.law.cornell.edu/federal/

US Code:   http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/

Popular names of some criminal statutes that apply to prostitution are Mann Act, Travel Act, Racketeering Influenced Corruption Act (RICO), and federal Wire Fraud and Money Laundering Statutes.   You have to find the actual section number in the US Code.  As many have said you will not be able understand the statutes very easily just by reading them (that's why lawyers are paid the big bucks).

Here's a very good case which explains the linkages between prostitution, the Travel Act, RICO, and money laundering.  It's still hard reading.

US vs. Griffith (7th Circuit, 1996)
http://www.kentlaw.edu/7circuit/1996/may/95-2244.html

I wasn't aware of that one.  Can you provide a cite?

When I got into this, I consulted with a lawyer who has experience in this field.  

I suggest you do the same.  

Nothing like looking through the yellow pages with one hand attached to a bar.  

Not that this isn't a wonderful forum!  Each state has different laws as well as those tricky federal laws to contend with.  

 

Its true that different Circuit Courts of Appeal may interpret the federal statutes differently.  

But its also true that its often easier to understand such Federal statutes as the Travel Act and the federal Money Laundering Statute by reading the cases that interpret them.  Of course you do have to be careful that the case has not been overuled or is interpreting an older version of the statute, but even those cases can be helpful.

For example, The Lost Collie Dog couldn't figure out what the apparently simple statutory language "transport any individual" (for purposes of prostitution) meant in the Mann Act.  Cases would have been helpful to determine whether it applied to escorts traveling across state lines.

And I challenge any one to figure out the applicability of the federal money laundering statute by just reading the statute.

Give it a try then take some alkaseltzer.

Federal Money Laundering Statute:
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/1956.html


Reading this Case is a lot easier (but still not light reading)
http://www.kentlaw.edu/7circuit/1996/may/95-2244.html

the US v Ginzburg case in the Supreme Court that upheld a federal obscenity conviction based upon "pandering" misconduct and general ass-holery by Mr Ginzburg.
"Pandering" to pornophiles was seen as more evidence of criminal intent.
Commentators and constitutional scholars criticized the Ginzburg case as an aberration to zap Mr Ginzburg because he was a schmuck.
There is more to it, but if there is an actual federal pandering statute, it's news to us collie dogs with huge schlongs.

The Mann Act prohibits what is often called "pandering".

18 USC Section 2422(a) provides:

"Whoever knowingly persuades, induces, entices, or coerces any individual to travel in interstate or foreign commerce, or in any Territory or Possession of the United States, to engage in prostitution, or in any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense, or attempts to do so, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 10 years, or both. "
http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/2422.html


For example, the Nevada Statutes against prostitution refer to this kind of enticing as "pandering".  

See, Section 201.300. "Pandering: Definition; punishment; exception."

http://www.wfu.edu/Academic-departments/Pre-Law-Advising/vegas/revstat.html#201.300.

The case US V Ginzburg has to do with kiddie porn.  Just put Federal pandering in and hit enter on the computer and it came up.  Pandering seems to be a word bantered about in Law.
And if you two don't stop it the ladies will have to start calling themselves things like "Bearded Clam" and "Clammed Up" and "Tight as a Clam" and "Clam Chowder".  Well, you get the idea.

then to practice in the federal litigation field for 5-20 years.
Then he'll realize how silly he looks trying to pretend, and how disjointed and poorly reasoned are his monologues.

The Mann Act does not use the word "pandering," as you failed to notice. The word "pandering" never appears in Mann, Travel, or Laundering cases, not as the element of any federal crime.
It was used in an obscenity case, not Mann Act, and the word was not in the obscenity statute in any event.

Nevada is a State, not a federal entity, and its use of "pandering" is its own, irrelevant to how anyone in the federal sector uses the word, and certainly not relevant to interpreting a federal statute.

I'm not sure what your agenda is except to try to  get attention and waste other people's time. Take your meds and try to contribute something positive to the boards instead of juvenile combat.

I have decided not to respond to your diatribes any further because it is such a pointless waste. When I see your name by a post it will not be opened because you've proven a lack of expertise and negative intent. It must be that depressing weather and industrial pollution around Seattle.

On top of that you don't even know what a search engine is.
Get a life. Do something positive and constructive.

you show that you were never a lawyer, not in this life and not in any other of your many lives.  

You make the lamest argument, one befitting someone who does his research by reading the first thing the google search engine brings up, but not by anyone familiar with the law, or even common sense.

I asked whether there was any federal statute which dealt with "pandering" (in connection with prostitution obviously), by which I meant the SUBJECT of "pandering".  That doesn't mean that the WORD "pandering" has to occur in the text of the statute, only one whose reasoning capability is limited to typing in words in the google search engine would make such a literal interpretation.

So what does "pandering" mean in connection with prostitution.  I confess I didn't know at first, but a little internet research revealed the following:

Many State statutes and cases referred to pandering as "enticing" or "recruiting" someone to become a prostitute.
 
For example, the Nevada Supreme Court discussed "pimping and pandering" as follows:

" The terms "pimping" and "pandering" have been used to describe promotion of prostitution, which is generally punished more severely than prostitution itself. 2 Wharton's Criminal Law, § 274 (14th ed. 1979). The referenced treatise [Wharton's] describes the principal difference between "pimping" and "pandering" thusly: "[A] 'pimp' solicits patrons for the prostitute and lives off her earnings, while a 'panderer' recruits prostitutes and sets them up in business." Id. This definition is consistent with case law in Nevada, as well as other jurisdictions. [citing cases from many jurisdictions]"
http://www.wfu.edu/Academic-departments/Pre-Law-Advising/vegas/stanifer.html

Similarly, I found a great Texas prostitution law website which had a lot of Texas cases about "pandering" as enticing one to become a prostitute.
http://clarit.home.mindspring.com/txcases.htm

So armed with that understanding of the term "pandering", I found that the federal Mann Act prohibited such enticing also.  I will admit that "pandering" is not always a very well defined term, and is often equated with "pimping" or procuring a customer for a prostitute.  That's one of the  dictionary definitions.


So whats the moral of this story?  Lost Collie Dogs shouldn't practice law by google,  and should try to entertain us in other ways.