WASHINGTON – Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley today is calling on the Department of Homeland Security to adopt a zero tolerance policy for employees who fuel the demand for human trafficking through the solicitation of prostitution. Grassley’s request follows recent news reports that at least two Federal Air Marshals were under investigation by the Transportation Security Administration for recording encounters with prostitutes on government-issued cell phones.

In 2012, Department of Homeland Security and Justice Department watchdogs found that U.S. Secret Service employees paid for sex while in Colombia, which led to new agency guidance regarding the off-duty conduct of employees.  However, that guidance failed to explicitly ban the procurement of commercial sex.  Both the U.S. Secret Service and the Transportation Security Administration operate within Department of Homeland Security.

In a letter to Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson, Grassley noted the State Department and Justice Department positions that the purchase of sex increases the demand for human trafficking and sex slavery.  Grassley called on Johnson to establish a zero tolerance policy for employees who purchase, procure or accept commercial sex.

Grassley sent similar letters to the State Department and Justice Department following allegations of misconduct by diplomats and federal law enforcement employees.

Text of Grassley’s letter to the Department of Homeland Security follows:

September 28, 2015

VIA ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION

The Honorable Jeh Johnson 
Secretary 
U.S. Department of Homeland Security 
Washington, D.C. 20528 

Dear Secretary Johnson:

According to the State Department’s Trafficking in Persons Report, “[t]hose who patronize the commercial sex industry form a demand which traffickers seek to satisfy.”   In February, 180 victims’ advocacy groups told this Committee that “[t]he elimination of sex trafficking is fundamentally linked to targeting the demand for commercial sex.  Any effort to prevent sex trafficking must focus on the sex buyers and facilitators.”   I am writing to express my concern that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) may not be taking adequate steps to deter its own employees from buying sex and thereby contributing to this demand. 

Earlier this month, news outlets reported that at least two Federal Air Marshals employed by the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) were under investigation for engaging in sexual activity with prostitutes and for recording those acts on government-issued cell phones.   TSA investigators reportedly discovered video-footage of this misconduct while examining the cell phone of one of the employees during a separate investigation of a worker’s compensation claim.   DHS’ accidental discovery of this misconduct raises a question as to whether there are other cases of such misconduct that have gone undetected.  

This report follows the 2012 findings of the Justice Department’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) and the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) OIG that U.S. Secret Service (USSS) employees in Colombia paid women for sexual encounters.   In response to this incident, USSS issued new guidance and policies governing the off-duty conduct of its employees, but did not explicitly ban the procurement of commercial sex.  

According to the Office of the Attorney General, regardless of whether prostitution is legal or tolerated in a particular jurisdiction, “soliciting prostitutes creates a greater demand for human trafficking victims and a consequent increase in the number of minor and adult persons trafficked into commercial sex slavery.”   Further, according to the State Department: 

It is the position of the U.S. government that the procurement of commercial sex can fuel the demand for sex trafficking. . . .  [A] victim of sex trafficking may not appear to be under duress, given that coercion and threats of violence are often used to hold people in servitude . . . .  [A]ssumptions based on appearances as to whether or not an individual is 18 years old are frequently erroneous, as many brothel managers and pimps dress minors to look older.  

Given the gravity of these concerns, a bright line rule is needed to warn all DHS employees, not just the Secret Service, to steer well clear of contributing to the demand for human trafficking, regardless of whether prostitution is legal or tolerated in a particular jurisdiction.  To achieve true deterrence, a sufficiently serious penalty must be attached to a violation of that rule.   

Anything short of termination for employees who violate the policy is not zero tolerance.  The failure to adopt such a zero tolerance policy may send a message to would-be johns, pimps, and human traffickers, that the U.S. Department of Homeland Security tolerates employees who solicit prostitutes. 

    Accordingly, please provide responses to the following questions by October 9, 2015: 

1.    Under Title 5 of the United States Code, federal employees are entitled to certain federal civil service protections.   None of these protections preclude DHS from adopting a zero tolerance policy that requires a minimum penalty of proposed termination for all DHS employees who are determined to have engaged in the solicitation of prostitution, without exception.  Such a policy would not prevent affected employees from replying to the proposal, furnishing exculpatory evidence, appealing unfavorable decisions, or from exercising any of the other due process rights enumerated above.  Accordingly, would you consider adopting such a policy?  If not, please explain why not. 

2.    Will you establish a Department-wide policy making clear that soliciting, procuring, or accepting commercial sex is prohibited?  If so, will you clarify that this rule applies at all times during an individual’s employment, including while off duty or on personal leave, and applies regardless of whether the activity is legal or tolerated in a particular jurisdiction, foreign or domestic? 

3.    According to reports, the two Federal Air Marshals involved in the prostitution allegations have been placed on an indefinite suspension without pay, pending an active investigation by TSA.   Reportedly, a third employee has resigned from the agency.  

a.    On what date did TSA initiate an investigation into these allegations?  

b.    Was the OIG ever notified of these allegations?  If so, when?  If not, why not? 

c.    For what alleged misconduct was the now-retired employee investigated?  

d.    On what date did the third employee resign from the Department? 

Please number your responses according to their corresponding questions.  Should you have any questions, please contact Jay Lim of my Committee staff at (202) 224-5225.

Sincerely,

Charles E. Grassley
Chairman
Senate Committee on the Judiciary 

cc:
The Honorable Patrick Leahy
Ranking Member
Senate Committee on the Judiciary 

The Honorable John Roth
Inspector General
U.S. Department of Homeland Security

 

-30-