Abstract:
Despite the large number of bills being introduced and enacted, and the amount of resources and labor the federal government has poured into ending modern-day slavery, human trafficking victims face real hurdles in obtaining the services and benefits created for them. The rush to enact anti-trafficking laws has been saddled with an unwillingness to confer the rights and benefits traditional crime victims typically receive. This is because the federal and state governmental response to trafficking victims begins with making them prove it. This practice has gained wide acceptance in America. Unfortunately, with the practice’s dominance, governments have not examined whether proof of victim status is necessary, much less whether it should be required for all human trafficking victims. This article addresses the challenges human trafficking victims face in proving victim status and obtaining entitlements traditional crime victims generally receive. Part two of this article examines what distinguishes human trafficking victims from traditional crime victims. It also establishes the standard of proof in federal and state anti-trafficking law definitions and which criminal justice actors are responsible for conferring victim status while a case is pending. Part three of the article discusses the difficulties victims face in obtaining restitution in federal courts and state Crime Victim Compensation funds. Part four analyzes whether the victim proof requirement is justified and whether placing barriers before victim entitlements is warranted. In the end, this article challenges governments to reconsider proof of victim status and the obstacles they have placed before the protections, services, and benefits human trafficking victims are legally entitled to receive. (from Author Introduction)