What is the punishment for slavery in the United States? It appears that slavery is in fact illegal. What is the punishment for practicing it?
Federal Law Slavery and involuntary servitude is unconstitutional in the U.S. under the 13th Amendment, and Congress was given the power to enact laws enforcing that prohibition. Exceptions There is an exception in the 13th Amendment for slavery or involuntary servitude as punishment for a crime. In practice, this means that involuntary chain gangs for people in prison, and military sentences to hard labor are permitted. The 13th Amendment has also been interpreted to not forbid compulsory military service pursuant to a draft, so long as a non-soldier option is available for conscientious objectors, and does not forbid compelling soldiers to complete their term of enlistment. There are also isolated circumstances where involuntary servitude has been allowed for civilians, including jury duty, attorneys who are ordered by a court to represent an indigent defendant, doctors who cannot abandon a patient in a critical condition, and babysitters who can't abandon children who would be in peril if the babysitter left. Federal Penalties Set Forth In Statutes The answer from user6726 correctly links to the federal laws setting forth the criminal penalties under federal law for slavery related offenses, and a prison sentence of up to twenty years is the penalty for having a slave (i.e. holding someone in peonage). Those laws also mandate restitution awards and authorize civil lawsuits if a prosecutor fails to bring criminal charges. Impact Of The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines A judge sentencing someone for a slavery offense upon a conviction could award any lesser amount of imprisonment instead, however, and would be influenced in exercising his discretion by the United States Sentencing Guidelines which provide an advisory guide on the correct sentence. The relevant U.S. Sentencing Guideline states: 4. PEONAGE, INVOLUNTARY SERVITUDE, SLAVE TRADE, AND CHILD SOLDIERS Historical Note Effective November 1, 1987. Amended effective November 1, 2009 (amendment 733). §2H4.1. Peonage, Involuntary Servitude, Slave Trade, and Child Soldiers (a) Base Offense Level: (1) 22; or (2) 18, if (A) the defendant was convicted of an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 1592, or (B) the defendant was convicted of an offense under 18 U.S.C. § 1593A based on an act in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1592. (b) Specific Offense Characteristics (1) (A) If any victim sustained permanent or life-threatening bodily injury, increase by 4 levels; or (B) if any victim sustained serious bodily injury, increase by 2 levels. (2) If (A) a dangerous weapon was used, increase by 4 levels; or (B) a dangerous weapon was brandished, or the use of a dangerous weapon was threatened, increase by 2 levels. (3) If any victim was held in a condition of peonage or involuntary servitude for (A) more than one year, increase by 3 levels; (B) between 180 days and one year, increase by 2 levels; or (C) more than 30 days but less than 180 days, increase by 1 level. (4) If any other felony offense was committed during the commission of, or in connection with, the peonage or involuntary servitude offense, increase to the greater of: (A) 2 plus the offense level as determined above, or (B) 2 plus the offense level from the offense guideline applicable to that other offense, but in no event greater than level 43. The base offense level and modification in the language above and additional modifications from other parts of the guidelines are used to produce a final offense level. A pretty typical offense level for this crime would be 25 if no other aggravating circumstances are present. Then another set of guidelines is used to determine how much of a prior criminal record the convicted defendant had prior to this offense. The sentencing guidelines then have a grid that combined offense level and prior criminal record score to produce a proposed advisory range of guideline sentences for the offense. That would be a sentence of 57-71 months (about 5-6 years) for someone with no prior criminal records and up to 110 to 137 months (a little under 10 to almost 12 years) for someone with a lengthy and serious criminal record. Of course, lots of cases of slavery will often also involve other offenses (such as kidnapping, rape or pimping), and sentences for these more aggravated cases would be longer. State Law Reform Efforts Colorado voters narrowly rejected a constitutional amendment proposed by two-thirds majorities in both houses of the state legislature to eliminate this exception in its state constitution in the November 2016 election. A small number of other states have removed this exception from their state constitutional prohibitions of slavery. Where the exception is eliminated, only voluntary prison labor would be allowed and sentences to hard labor would be prohibited. State Criminal Penalties In addition to federal laws imposing criminal penalties for slavery and involuntary servitude, the practice is also outlawed under states laws. For example, the relevant statutes in Colorado state: § 18-3-503. Human trafficking for involuntary servitude - human trafficking of a minor for involuntary servitude (1) A person who knowingly sells, recruits, harbors, transports, transfers, isolates, entices, provides, receives, or obtains by any means another person for the purpose of coercing the other person to perform labor or services commits human trafficking for involuntary servitude. (2) Human trafficking for involuntary servitude is a class 3 felony; except that human trafficking of a minor for involuntary servitude is a class 2 felony. § 18-3-504. Human trafficking for sexual servitude - human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude (1)(a) A person who knowingly sells, recruits, harbors, transports, transfers, isolates, entices, provides, receives, or obtains by any means another person for the purpose of coercing the person to engage in commercial sexual activity commits human trafficking for sexual servitude. (b) Human trafficking for sexual servitude is a class 3 felony. (2)(a) A person who knowingly sells, recruits, harbors, transports, transfers, isolates, entices, provides, receives, obtains by any means, maintains, or makes available a minor for the purpose of commercial sexual activity commits human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude. (b) Human trafficking of a minor for sexual servitude is a class 2 felony. (c) In any prosecution under this subsection (2), it is not a defense that: (I) The minor consented to being sold, recruited, harbored, transported, transferred, isolated, enticed, provided, received, obtained, or maintained by the defendant for the purpose of engaging in commercial sexual activity; (II) The minor consented to participating in commercial sexual activity; (III) The defendant did not know the minor's age or reasonably believed the minor to be eighteen years of age or older; or (IV) The minor or another person represented the minor to be eighteen years of age or older. (3) A person does not need to receive any of the proceeds of any commercial sexual activity to commit an offense described in this section. (4) Conviction for an offense described in this section does not preclude conviction for an offense described in article 6 or 7 of this title based in whole or in part on the same or related conduct, and the court shall not require the prosecution to elect at trial between such offenses. In Colorado class 1 felonies are felonies punishable by death or life imprisonment (i.e. first degree murder or kidnapping under circumstances where it is presumed that the victim died). Other class 2 felonies include second degree murder, aggravated kidnapping where the victim is released alive, gang rape, armed rape and rape involving serious bodily injury. Class 2 human trafficking is punishable by 16 to 48 years in prison (which can be reduced by 25% for good behavior) followed by 5 years of post-release supervision. Other class 3 felonies including armed robbery, aggravated assault causing serious bodily injury, aggravated rape (other than those that are class 3 felonies), and heat of passion murder. Class 3 human trafficking is punishable by 8 to 24 years in prison (which can be reduced by 25% of good behavior) followed by five years of post-release supervision. In general, penalties under Colorado's state laws would be more serious than those under federal law pursuant to the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines for the same offense, but in other states, the penalty might be more lenient than under federal law or there might be no specific state law offense for holding someone as a slave. An Example Of A State Criminal Prosecution For Holding A Slave These statutes are not just a dead letter. For example, there is a man who is a Saudi Arabian citizen who is currently in a Colorado State prison for keeping a young woman as a slave doing housework in his home in Colorado. Homaidan Ali Al-Turki (born 1969) is a Saudi national convicted in a Colorado court for sexually assaulting his Indonesian housekeeper and keeping her as a virtual slave for four years. On August 31, 2006, Al-Turki was sentenced to 28 years in prison on twelve felony counts of false imprisonment, unlawful sexual contact, theft and criminal extortion. In February 25, 2011, He was re-sentenced from 28 to eight years for his good behavior in prison. A reduction from 28 years to 8 years in a re-sentencing for good behavior in prison is almost completely unheard of, and realistically, reflects a diplomatic negotiation between the U.S. government and the Saudi Arabian government to ease Saudi Arabian government dissatisfaction with the conviction for conduct that would not have resulted in any criminal charged in Saudi Arabia in all likelihood.
Civil law instead of criminal law Not all things that we commonly refer to as "illegal" are actually crimes - many of them refer to violations of contracts or other obligations where the harmed party may (or may not) use the civil system to obtain some satisfaction, but the government and prosecutors will not do it for them. In general (with some exceptions, depends on jurisdiction and circumstances), most low scale copyright violations are treated as a civil matter - it allows the harmed party (i.e. the copyright owner) to sue you for damages in a civil court, if they wish and are able to do so. However, it generally is not a crime (again, with some exceptions - e.g. large scale distribution often is) so the government and police on their own cannot, should not and does not investigate and prosecute violations of software licence terms.
If the tool circumvents Windows' copy protection (which is a computer question, not a legal one, but I cannot imagine a circumstance in which this isn't access-circumvention), then it is a violation of 17 USC 1201, which forbids &quot;circumvent[ing] a technological measure that effectively controls access to a work protected under this title&quot;. It is both illegal to use, and to &quot;manufacture, import, offer to the public, provide, or otherwise traffic&quot; in such a program.
No. Police are not permitted to impose any punishment whatsoever. Their role in the American justice system is to prevent and investigate criminal offenses. What you're describing is a punishment for a criminal offense, even though it is imposed outside the criminal justice system. The same principles that prevent an officer from punching a suspect in the face or demanding a cash payment to not write a ticket prohibit a police officer from imposing a punishment of his own design, with or without your consent.
The First Amendment states Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. It thus protects such videos. An analogous situation is that there is network news coverage of riots, bank robberies, terrorist attacks and assaults. Backpage was seized because it facilitated prostitution, not just reported or even encouraged it. That is basically where the line exists.
In all likelihood, the judge's order related to data collection and reselling is not legally enforceable. They weren't parties to the expungement action, so the judge doesn't have jurisdiction over them. And, the First Amendment protects the right to say truthful things pretty absolutely. Arguably, if the sites provided the information without making clear that it might not be current because records were expunged or corrected, there might be a claim for negligent misrepresentation, false light, or even defamation, but I seriously doubt that even those claims would hold up. The language in the order might cause sites to comply out of not legally justified concern, or just a desire to be accurate, even if it is not enforceable. So, it doesn't hurt to bring that information to the attention of such sites and ask them to take down the information. But, when push comes to shove, I very much doubt that you would prevail in court enforcing that order against them. Certainly, if you do nothing, they will do nothing, because they are not psychic and have no idea that the court order related to those records has been entered. Even a valid and enforceable order directed at a party over whom a court has jurisdiction is not effective until the person ordered to comply with it has notice of the order. And, there is no system that gives sites like that notice without you taking action to inform them of an order.
Yes. It is a crime almost everywhere to throw something at someone, even if it causes little or no injury. Usually it would be classified as "assault and battery" although if it damages clothing or other property, it could also be called, for example, "criminal mischief" which is intentional damage to property. It would also be a tort that could be enforced with civil damages in most places, although only nominal damages would be awarded and there would be no award for attorneys' fees. In practice, however, few people would press charges or turn to the police in such an incident, few police would take action based on the complaint because it is so trivial, and few people would sue in such a case. For what it is worth, the "living law" in Japan recognizes that someone has a duty to pay to clean your clothes or replace them if they can't be cleaned in such circumstances and most people appear to comply with that obligation without court involvement if the victim insists. Also, pie throwing as a political protest in Europe is also almost surely illegal under European law, although, again, this is rarely enforced by common political culture and tradition.
Yes, such a scenario is plausible, and there are some cases where it has probably happened. But since juries do not normally give reasons for their votes, it is hard to establish when it has and when it has not happened, and I have seen no statistics on such occurrences. By the way, &quot;Jury Nullification&quot; is simply when one or more jury members vote in a particular way because of something other than the law and evidence as presented in the trial. Most often the term is used when a jury votes to acquit because they dislike or disapprove of the law involved. For example, in the 1850s a number of people accused of violating the US Fugitive Slave Law by harboring runaway slaves were acquitted, reputedly because juries who disliked the law (quite unpopular in many northern states) no matter what the evidence. Later, during Prohibition, some people charged with possessing or selling alcohol were acquitted, reputedly by juries who disapproved of Prohibition. In both cases, it is hard to get authoritative sources that specific cases were actual instances of jury nullification. Anyway, a juror need not &quot;ask&quot; for jury nullification, that juror just votes to acquit. A jury that votes to acquit (or convict) because of political or personal views about the accused might be said to be &quot;biased&quot; but I am not sure if that would be described as &quot;jury nullification&quot;.