No Constitutional Right to Engage in Prostitution

In the recent Division One opinion from the Arizona court of appeals, State v. Freitag, the court continued with the longstanding interpretation that there is no constitutional right to engage in or solicit prostitution. In the case, the appellant cited the recent U.S. supreme court opinion in Lawrence v. Texas, 59 U.S. 558 (2003), as support for his right to engage in consensual commercial sexual activity. In Lawrence, the U.S. supreme court ruled that a Texas statute prohibiting certain sexual activity between members of the same sex was unconstitutional. However, the Supreme Court didn't declare that this liberty interest was a fundamental right. Instead, the Supreme Court reasoned that the Texas statute furthered no legitimate state interest to justify the intrusion into the personal and private life of the individual. The Arizona court of appeals refused to find a fundamental constitutional right to engage in prostitution. In holding that the law was constitutional, the court reasoned that there was a legitimate interest in criminalizing such activity, in order to control disease, exploitation, and other criminal activity that surrounds the prostitution industry. However, couldn't such legitimate state interests also be fulfilled by regulating the industry, rather than criminalizing it? There are certain portions of Nevada where the industry is regulated, rather than criminalized. Is the law there more to enforce morality, rather than to protect against the legitimate state interests cited?

For further information on Arizona sex offenses, including typical charges, potential punishments, and possible defenses, please visit www.win-law.com.