Human trafficking law being 'weaponized' against religious groups, attorney claims

A federal law designed to combat human trafficking could be used to target churches and other religious communities whose members voluntarily donate their time and labor, attorney John Lauro warned, pointing to a lawsuit accusing the Salvation Army of forced labor.

In an interview on The Epoch Times’ “American Thought Leaders” program, Lauro argued that a 2008 amendment to the Trafficking Victims Protection Act broadened the definition of “serious harm” to include psychological and nonphysical harm.

According to Lauro, the change could allow people to sue religious organizations years after voluntarily taking part in their activities.

“This statute … is like a dagger pointed at the soul of every voluntary religious community in the United States,” the attorney argued.

“That provision has been weaponized by plaintiffs’ lawyers and also under the Biden administration by law enforcement and politically activist prosecutors to go after religious and spiritual minorities,” he added. “It violates the First Amendment and it violates our Constitution and every principle that is important in the United States.”

Lauro cited a lawsuit brought by former participants in the Salvation Army’s residential rehabilitation program, who alleged that the organization forced them to work in exchange for food, clothing and housing.

“So the Salvation Army is Christian-based, and it practices something called tough love, which means you have to work for your room and board,” the attorney said. “So it had, I believe it was in Chicago, a program where people who are on probation or in divorce programs would have to work at the Salvation Army.

“They weren’t paid. They were given room and board, but it was sort of a tough-love program to get through if you’ve done something wrong,” he continued. “That makes sense to you and me.”

“Well, these participants, years later, said, 'I was coerced,'” Lauro said. “'My psychological will was overcome. And as a result, I’m going to sue the Salvation Army for forced labor.'”

The plaintiffs filed their complaint in 2021. After the Salvation Army moved to dismiss the case, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois threw out the claims, and the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals upheld that ruling in August 2024.

The 7th Circuit’s opinion, which summarized the plaintiffs’ allegations, said participants received food, clothing and housing and were required to work about 40 hours a week. The work included cooking, washing dishes, loading and unloading donations, working in warehouses and doing jobs at the organization’s thrift stores. Participants received weekly gratuities of $1 to $25.

The plaintiffs alleged that the work was physically demanding and sometimes dangerous. They also claimed participants were discouraged from leaving with warnings that they would lose access to food and shelter.

Some plaintiffs entered the program voluntarily, while parole or probation officers referred others. Those referred through the criminal justice system alleged that leaving the program could land them behind bars.

The plaintiffs also alleged that the Salvation Army limited participants’ outside communication early in the program and required them to temporarily sign over certain government benefits to the organization.

According to the opinion, the Salvation Army described the work as “work therapy.”

The appeals court found that the plaintiffs had not plausibly shown that the Salvation Army violated federal forced-labor law. It also concluded that participants who enrolled voluntarily were free to leave, and that the organization could require them to keep participating satisfactorily in exchange for food, clothing and housing.

Lauro listed another lawsuit, involving the Maryknoll Sisters, a Catholic religious order. A former member claimed her volunteer work had been psychologically coerced. A federal court dismissed that suit in March 2023.

Still, Lauro said, the nuns had to “spend thousands and thousands of dollars defending themselves under a forced labor statute.”

While the attorney acknowledged that psychological persuasion exists, he argued that the law should distinguish between genuine forced labor and voluntary participation in religious or spiritual communities.

“[I]f I want to practice some kind of spiritual or religious belief, however obnoxious it may seem to you, that’s protected. And if I decide to give voluntarily of my time, my energy, my money, then that’s also protected, and it should never result in a crime or civil damages,” Lauro said.

“But what’s happened is it’s been weaponized by plaintiffs’ lawyers, and it’s been weaponized by certain people in law enforcement,” he continued.