Human trafficking is big business, with industry estimates running in the billions of dollars annually. Much of that profit accrues to traffickers, illegal profiteers, and organized crime groups. However, the private sector-including legitimate businesses and industries-also reaps economic benefits, directly and indirectly, from the trafficking and related exploitation of persons. Despite these economic realities, the dominant approach to combating human trafficking has been to rely almost exclusively on governments and social services organizations to do the job. Little has been asked of the private sector. Two important bills-one adopted by the State of California and the otherintroduced in the U.S. House of Representatives-might signal the beginning of a change in the prevailing approach to combating human trafficking.
Part I of this Essay briefly discusses human trafficking and current responses to the problem. As Part I reveals, despite the gravity of the problem, the private sector has been largely overlooked to date. Part II then looks specifically at the value of and rationale for private sector involvement in antitrafficking efforts. The discussion in Part II implicates a much broader debate in the literature on corporate social responsibility.9 I explore that literature in greater depth in a forthcoming article and instead focus in this shorter Essay on sketching out what the private sector could add to anti-trafficking efforts. Given that private sector involvement offers unique benefits to anti-trafficking initiatives, Part III explores governmental means of fostering private sector engagement in the fight against human trafficking. Finally, in Part IV, this Essay returns to the California Transparency Act-the first significant law aimed at spurring private sector efforts to stop human trafficking-to look at what lessons might be drawn from early responses to the new law.
This piece was written for a program held by the American Association of Law Schools Section on Law and Humanities, "Excavating and Integrating Law and Humanities in the Core Curriculum," on January 5, 2012.
Like many who attend law school, I was an undergraduate history major. The humanities, my college pre-professional advisor assured me, were ideal preparation for the rigors of law school. I believed the hype. Three years later, on my first day of Contracts, my blind faith in the inherent compatibility of the humanities and legal education was rewarded with a sinking feeling that would, in time, give way to nausea. I had been duped. I had envisioned exuberant discussions led by a pipe-smoking, tweed-jacketed professor about the great moments in the history of contract law. Instead, the class began with the professor (sans pipe and tweed jacket) scrawling the Coase Theorem on the chalkboard. There were numbers. I felt the bile rising in my throat.
Although I learned to deal with the numbers, I could not help feeling that something was missing from the experience. Where was the social and historical context that could illuminate these doctrines? As we marched methodically through the substance of each course, we never stopped to dwell on the connections that linked cases that were thematically distinct, but connected contextually and chronologically.
Though it would have been easy to submit to this standard law school pedagogy, I did not swallow my misgivings and fall in line. I did not go gently into that good night! I became a law professor, and I vowed to find a way to reach my fellow poets, artists, and historians.
NEWS & EVENTS
March 05, 2014What an Originalist Would Understand “Corruption” to Mean
Founded in 1912, CLR publishes six times per year on a variety of engaging topics in legal scholarship.
The law review is edited and published entirely by students at Berkeley Law.