It is time to be part of the solution

Are you a erotic service provider and you are tired of the discrimination?  Are you a client and tired of the risks involved?  It is time the adult community steps up and support the US constitutional challenge on  prostitution laws between consenting adults.  This is how Rhode Island got indoor sex work decriminalized from 1979 until 2009.  It was because of the case Coyote vs Robert.  
 
esplerp.org has already retained the best privacy attorney in the US and we have our arguments drafted and we have already raised over 27,000 and we are just 3 grand a way from filing and demanding our rights

Or anything proving your legitimacy? As a whoremonger who encourages others to stop living in the shadows, I am supportive of your cause, but i am cautious with my money.

If you can direct me to someplace that shows your legitimacy  and points me to any of your past activities it would go a long ways towards opening my checkbook.

It is called the erotic service providers legal educational and research project and we are a 501 3 c

We know we will win a constitutional challenge as it has been done before In Rhode Island.

COYOTE v. Roberts (Rhode Island, 1981)

Summary
In 1976 the Rhode Island chapter of COYOTE, a sex workers’ rights activist organization, sued the Rhode Island attorney general regarding the constitutionality of the state’s prostitution laws. COYOTE argued that the statute’s language was overbroad and encroached on the rights of privacy and association by criminalizing forms of noncommercial sex, going beyond what the statute was supposed to address. After trial was over but before the court issued a ruling, the Rhode Island legislature amended the statute to only criminalize street solicitation.

This case became moot when the Rhode Island legislature rewrote the prostitution statutes over which COYOTE had sued because the re-written statutes contained none of the language that the plaintiffs put at issue. Under the new law prostitution itself, i.e. the exchange or promise of sexual favors in return for a fee or other consideration, was not prohibited until the state legislature re-criminalized it almost 30 years later in 2009.

Because the issue was moot, the court then turned to the question of whether COYOTE could be considered a prevailing party and therefore entitled to attorney’s fees – a provision found in most in civil rights statutes – under the catalyst theory of public interest litigation, where an entity voluntarily corrects a legal issue without a court order or decree while judgment is pending to resolve that very issue and the pending case becomes moot. The Rhode Island federal court found that COYOTE could be considered a “prevailing party” under the catalyst theory, even though no proof was presented that the COYOTE lawsuit was what prompted Rhode Island legislators to amend the prostitution statute.

Not all jurisdictions follow the catalyst theory in public-interest litigation. This case is remarkable not only because COYOTE was awarded fees, but because it got fees without a showing of causation – proof that the COYOTE lawsuit was the reason the law was amended. In fact, the court heard the testimony of several legislators, neighborhood organizers, and law enforcement personnel where all of them denied ever hearing of COYOTE or the pending lawsuit.

END OF MESSAGE

I believe it will be the 5th circuit federal court but if you want to double check, then go to esplerp.org and ask them by email.  Esplerp is more then willing to answer questions, do press interviews ect.

A place I might add has a thriving P4P  industry, completely legal and PROOF POSITIVE that the hobby can be legal, safe and nothing like the overly restrictive Nevada model.

I will see if I can take some time to check you out a bit and then most likely write you a check. I think your cause is worthwhile.

Us  law makes it a crime to promote prostitution even in countries that it is legal.   It was just last year that TBA tours in NY owner was finally convicted for selling tours to the Philippines  where one could go to a bar and pay to take a bar girl out for the evening, it was legal and the women were registered, yet the state of NY made a special law so they could convict this poor guy, as it took 3 trials over 10 years to get a conviction.  

We have had a few wins, like when the US Supreme Court Struck Down Anti-Prostitution Pledge for US Groups and said it was unconstitutional.  We have no doubt many of these laws that target escorts and clients are also unconstitutional.  

 I agree the Nevada brothels are under legalization is horrible, , and they require all the women to go down to the sheriffs dept and register and it becomes public record, so anyone can look their personal information up and  stalk or discriminate against them.  The brothel also takes 1/2 their earnings, then makes them pay daily rent, and the worker has to pay for her work permit and weekly testing. The workers are FORCED to live on the premises if they want to work.

 Now in Rhode Island under decriminalization,  from 1979 until 2009 meant the women could work from home, hotels, or for agencies and spas.  The spas charged the client a 50 dollar door fee, and the worker and client negotiated and the workers got to keep ALL THEIR EARNINGS, and there was no registration, no forced testing  and the women were not FORCED to live on the premises if they want to work. They never found 1 case of trafficking in RI during that 30 years period.  Clients drove from NH, Maine, Vt, CT, NY, + Ma and all came and spend their money in the Ocean state, and we even caught the Craigslist killer back in 2009, because after the man killed the girl in Boston, he came to Rhode Island and robbed a escort and she was able to dial 911, and he was caught quickly.  During this same time period over a dozen escorts were murdered and dumped on Gilgo Beach in Long Island, the cops didn't do much to investigate and they think it wer a least 2 different serial killers involved..  Criminalization did nothing to protect these women.

We do have  the 3 plaintiffs picked out, 1 is a man who is disabled and wants the right to buy sex, and another is a brothel worker who lives in CA and doesn't understand why she has to leave the state she lives in to work legally. We think the 3rd one may be a women that wants the right to buy sex.

Thank you for your interest and for supporting the adult community.

Dear Gina:
Just wondering are these judges elected or appointed? If so would these Judges be considerably more conservative than the court that rendered you a positive verdict in 1979? Finally where does the state legislature stand on this issue and are you or any of the groups that you are involved with trying to craft a law after the case to preserve your right to practice your business if this case is not solved in the courts or is the subject to controversial and the state to conservative to even attempt that?

The 1979 Rhode Island Supreme Court was appointed by a legislative committee (they are now appointed by the governor).  

I don't understand the OP's claim that the case will likely be heard by the "5th Circuit Federal Court."  The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals hears cases from federal district courts in Louisiana, Mississippi and Texas.  One of those courts must hear and decide the case before it is appealed to the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals.  So the OP is confused about something.  And I would seriously question initiating the case in the Bible Belt.

Also to claim that a RI state court decision is "proof we will win" is a major stretch.  In court there are no guarantees, and federal court does not follow state court precedent.  

Furthermore, there is no information about this case on the website that the OP is linking to.  Most of the information on it looks like it is from 2012 and before.   Please correct me if I'm missing something.

I obviously support the case in theory, but I would need more real and factual info before I donate to the cause.  Perhaps one of the lawyers can provide information about where they plan on filing the case, and what arguments they plan on making.

This will be filed as a special action for declaratory judgment at the 9th Circuit directly.   One issue is to have plantiff's with standing which they have found.  Since not yet arrested or cases tried in lower courts they have to show they are at risk of arrest to have standing to bring this type of action.

The attorney is well known and has won adult cases.  See his video which I believe is in the link posted.

From last I knew it will combine privacy issues etc in Lawrence v Texas and a more recent adult win in the 5th Circuit.   Only relates to private consenting adults (not street hookers).

The issue to get the case going of course is money for the legal battle which may cost $100k+ Initially funds are sought to file

The first step is to get the declaratory action heard in a lower court, and a decision in your favor. You then need the AG's office to appeal - they could simply decide not to, taking the wind out of your sails.  

Assuming the AG appeals, then you get heard in the 9th. Win there, and....you're likely to get a request for an en banc hearing (the full 9th, instead of 3 judges). After that - maybe - a writ to SCOTUS. And that will get you....a possible audience with 4 very conservative judges, and one can-go-either-way justice.  

Did I mention that the 9th is the circuit most frequently overturned?

All of this will run well over $100K - more like $300K. I would suggest funding the first leg before filing the complaint, because no matter how good the lawyer, if they're working for a paycheck, they'll leave as soon as the paycheck stops. Nobody needs a bad receivable on their books.

The law should not allow public solicitation such as street walkers.

Would sex-workers be licensed, registered, tested for STD, tested for drugs. Many other professions are required to be licensed or registered. If a provider was registered then it would be a public record?  Cities could regulate through zoning laws where people could operate their businesses. Could hotels deny guests who were registered  workers.

We have had a few good wins as far as privacy laws and there is a list of them on esplerp.org

I believe supreme court judges are in office for a lifetime, so they are appointed and do not have to worry about public opinion and getting re elected.

We have even had 2 different federal judges that have rules in favor of bp, and stopped them from passing legislation requiring the sites to get verification through ID for all the people who post.  

 Ironically even though 2 federal judges have already ruled this unconstitutional, the federal government now has re introduced this same concept with  "Save Act"  that they are trying to push through.  The Save Act would force all adult entertainers offline.  They want the websites to get our ID and for the cops to be able to look at these records anytime.  This no doubt will be used to stalk, harass and discriminate against all erotic service providers, even if their jobs are legal.

In San Diego the strippers are suing the cops as when they come in for random inspections, they are wearing swat team gear, and taking pics of the girls have naked.  Not only are the asking the women for their ID,  they also want there social security numbers, which no doubt will be used by DOJ to block them from banking institutes.  Just as they threatened Chase +Citi bank to close the accounts of porn performers.   I can't post the links to these articles as TER won't allow any links that contain names but you can do a search for them.

Or you can follow me on twitter @coyoteri for daily updates.

So even though we have women running around having unprotected, casual free sex with strangers and they are not forced into testing, you want to require this of just the escorts.  

I have found in my experience that the people that want to force escorts int testing, are the ones not practicing safe sex themselves, and they just want someone to blame once they have made a poor decision.

 This line of thinking is highly offensive on so many levels.  Maybe we should require clients to get drug and stds testing on top of screening.....LOL

After all most of us working girls always play safely.  

Another factor is that most of us are independent, and the only people that take drugs tests are EMPLOYEES.  

 There is several articles out about new recent research out of Rhode Island that says between 2003 and 2009 the rapes and stds went down 31 to 36% in the state, because indoor sex work was decriminalized.

Yet just a few weeks ago in Rhode Island, on the news they announced that a local hospital was running a free std clinic because the infections int he state have gone up so much.  

In Rhode Island the women were free to work from homes, hotels or for spas or agencies.  Unless it is a business like a brothel or a spa, there would be no zoning requirements.  We had tons of spas all over Providence and other cities in RI and we never has any problems.

 I think your suggesting legalization, which means regulating women like cattle and that concept is even more problematic, as it creates illegal workers and legal workers and still gives the cops a reason to police us

In Nevada the women at the brothels have to registered with the sheriff office every 3 months, and it becomes public record so anyone can look it up.  Many of the women working in the places have no concept of the ramifications, until this information is used to take custody of their kids away, discriminate against them for housing, or further employment, banking institutes may close their accounts, and not approve their mortgages.  

They call this license a work permit and on it there are 2 boxes and one has to be checked the choices are prostitute or non prostitute, no other person in the US has to get a work permit other than a minor under 16 or a illegal immigrant.

In 2012 there was a women who had qui doing sex work, and in her country it was legal.  This lady was attending grad school and the during her custody hearings, the social worker was concerned that she wasn't ashamed that she use to be a escort, so they gave her abuse ex the kids, even though he had domestic violence charges and prior drug convictions.  This lay spend 4 years fighting for her kids and when the judge finally order a supervised visit, the ex stabbed the social worker and then stabbed and murder this women.  You can find this story by googling "Justice for Jasmine".  

So your idea of forcing us into anything, does nothing to stop the stigma that all of us working women are curb crawling addicts.

We have a saying "NOTHING ABOUT US WITHOUT US. and its the workers that should be at the table negotiating for their labor rights and fair work conditions, not the clients and not the public.

So before people come up with regulations as to how "the women" should run their own personal affairs, may I suggest you read the book "Taking the crime out of sex work, New Zealand sex workers fight to decriminalization

Dear Gina:
I am just wondering if you were a congresswoman would one of the first things that you would do would be to co-author and sponsor a bill that would make it illegal to ascertain any records of a medically diagnostic nature illegal for women who are trying to find mainstream employment in places where prostitution was legal?  Also would you say that all records for the purpose of public health be otherwise sealed with the exception of that person working in the commercial sex industry?  Also what do you think would be the biggest hurdles in getting the bill through committee and sub committee? Finally have you discussed this at length with any local politicians so you can take the temperature of what is transpiring in the state legislature?