Defendant’s Response To ESPLERP Supplemental Based on Obergefell
State Brief on Obergefell PDF Filed January 29.2016
constitution, Court Case, Erotic Service Providers, Sexual Freedom, Sexual Privacy
constitution
constitution, Court Case, H. Louis Sirkin, non profit, Uncategorized
Supplemental Brief Based On Obergefell v Hodges
Federal Court Judge White asked us to write another supplemental brief based on Obergefell v Hodges, the historic June 2015
constitution, Court Case, Uncategorized
Order to Vacate August 7th Hearing-Hearing Canceled
Hearing for Friday August 7, 2015 at the Oakland, California Federal Building has been canceled or vacated by the Judge.
constitution, Court Case, decriminalize prostitution, Erotic Service Providers, H. Louis Sirkin, Prostitutes free speech, Sexual Freedom, Sexual Privacy
Defendants Response To Our Opposition To Their Motion to Dismiss
DOC062315-06232015143256 Filed June 23, 2015 Legal History of California Penal Code 647(b)
constitution, Court Case, H. Louis Sirkin, Privacy, sexual commerce, Sexual Privacy
ESPLERP’s Opposition to Motion to Dismiss
Opposition to Motion to Dismiss Filed June8, 2015
constitution, Court Case, decriminalize prostitution, Erotic Service Providers, Sexual Freedom, Sexual Privacy
Three Anti Prostitution Laws Struck Down By Canadian High Court!
For Immediate Release December 20, 2013 San Francisco, California Contact Maxine Doogan 415-265-3302 info@espu-usa.com @esplerp One the heals of celebrating
constitution, decriminalize prostitution, HIV, Uncategorized
US’s Anti Prostitution Pledge Challenged at US Supreme Court
Oral arguments for AID V. ALLIANCE FOR OPEN SOCIETY INT L. at the US Supreme Court April 22nd. C-SPAN may
arrest, California Prop 35, CASE ACT, churches, constitution, decriminalize prostitution, Erotic Service Providers, evidence trafficking, Junk Science, No On 35, Opposition to prop 35, pimps, Prop 35, Rescue, sexual abuse juveniles, Sexual Freedom, Sexual Privacy, trafficking, Underage trafficking, Women's Fund Network
Endorsements No ON PROP 35
Proposition 35 forces voters to ask themselves a challenging question: Does sex trafficking need to be addressed at the ballot