THE CLAIM:
California just passed Senate Bill 145, a bill that would end felonies for child rape and legalize pedophilia in the state.
THE FACTS:
SB 145, which has passed the California Legislature and awaits Gov. Gavin Newsom’s signature, would not legalize pedophilia. The bill is intended to reform the state’s sex offender registry to be fairer to young LGBT adults.
It would give judges equal discretion to determine whether an adult, convicted of having non-coercive sex with someone under 18, must register as a sex offender — regardless of what kind of sex is involved.
Background
Under current law, judges have sentencing discretion only in cases of voluntary, but illegal, penile-vaginal sex with a minor age 14 to 17 and an adult within 10 years of the minor’s age. SB 145 would expand that judicial discretion to include cases of voluntary oral or anal sex between an adult and a minor, within the same age parameters.
The bill would not apply to cases involving any minor under the age of 14, nor would it apply to cases where the age gap is greater than 10 years. It also would not apply if either party claims the sex was involuntary.
‘Parity’ in Law’s Effect on LGBT Community
Advocates say the bill would apply California law more equitably to the LGBTQ community.
If signed into law, the bill would “bring much-needed parity” to California sex offender registration law, according to a statement from Los Angeles County District Attorney Jackie Lacey, who drafted the bill.
“This bill allows judges and prosecutors to evaluate cases involving consensual sex acts between young people, regardless of their sexual orientation, on an individual basis,” the statement said.
SB 145 has been widely condemned by social media users falsely claiming it would legalize pedophilia. “PEDOPHILIA is now LEGAL in CALIFORNIA,” read a Facebook post viewed more than 8 million times. “Now a 21 year old can have sex with an 11 year old, and not be listed on the sex registry as a sex offender. This is unbelievable California!”
Social Media Posts Misrepresent the Bill
Posts making such claims fundamentally misrepresent what SB 145 does, according to the bill’s authors and outside experts. Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School, called the claims “hogwash” in an interview with The Associated Press.
“The accusation that it somehow allows pedophilia is simply not true,” Levinson said.
The bill faced opposition in the Legislature by some lawmakers, including Democratic Assemblywoman Lorena Gonzalez. She said that the 10-year age gap was too broad. The same 10-year provision applies to existing law, however, in cases of penile-vaginal sex between a minor over 14 and an adult where intercourse was voluntary.
MGomez
September 11, 2020 at 8:46 pm
There he is…….the leather-clad Castro Street wiener.
GD
September 14, 2020 at 4:29 am
Do you think a young 14 year old boy can be easily influenced by a 24 year old man? Absolutely can and now you’re giving the old guy a new reason to go after children – he won’t have to be on the Sex Registry if he can prove the young child was complicit…..DISGUSTING! The Socialist Left is trying to make this seem “normal” to the rest of us so the punishment will eventually go away for RAPE.
Dan
September 17, 2020 at 8:06 pm
So maybe equalizing the treatment of oral/anal with vaginal isn’t a bad idea. But maybe that unequal treatment wasn’t the only bad thing about the old law. Maybe that part about allowing judicial discretion within a 10-year age gap was equally bad. A 24-year-old who has sex with a 14-year-old is a predator. Maybe changing it to a 3 year age gap should have been part of the new law. So that a 20-year-old with a 17-year-old falls within judicial discretion, or even a 19-year-old with a 16-year-old. A 10 year age gap is simply too much (when one of the parties is a minor – I’m not talking about a two legal adults ages 28 and 18.)
And another thing: Scott Wiener shouldn’t be taking ALL of the criticism on this. The law wouldn’t have passed without the support of a whole lot of other legislators. Nor without the support of the governor. There are plenty of people to share the criticism.
Bill
October 4, 2020 at 1:42 am
I suspect there is more comolexity to the current law and to creating new laws than we are ‘ allowed’ by the media to know. How easy is it to change and existing law? And what does involves to rewrite it completely? What about creating a total new law? If laws were easier to amend in its totality, then unfair laws may not survive from President to President but the same fate would go to good, well crafted and thought laws, they would be too easy to scrape or change to suit unfair Presidents agendas. I agree that not revising & reducing the 10 years gap while they were looking at this part of the legislation to make it fairer and more comprehensive they have made a mistake. But I wonder if the 10 years gap is a difficult part to amend for some reason. If so, the media should be asking and showing US the answers. Feel the media are not asking the right questions. Just trying to do a daily profit headline, both sides the pro and against this bill.