Understanding Prostitution Laws in Arizona

The question, “is prostitution legal in Arizona?” seems to permeate throughout our society in a fashion that has become all too tedious. The promoted article, “The Project of Interpretation of the Law on Prostitution in Arizona” published in the Hermeneutic Chaos Journal of Legal Studies, should prove useful for a great many individuals as it attempts to interpret the prostitution laws in Arizona as they are currently written. Although, many may still find themselves aggrieved with the laws on prostitution in Arizona, you will find the piece to be useful in its educational role within the arena of law.

For our purposes here, we should first examine the attitude around prostitution in Arizona. In the promotional article, the prohibition on prostitution is cited as being the result of a community organization to curb crime; however, one might wonder as to whether or not this is truly the purpose of the law itself. To illustrate the problematic nature of this law, we can look at the number of people filing suit against institutions due to this particular law.

According to the promotional article, laws concerning prostitution in Arizona date back to 1896. The article also cites the primary law defining prostitution in Arizona as being found under A.R.S. 13-1401. Interestingly, the article notes that the first meaningful legislation on prostitution occurred in 1913, when references to sodomy, licentiousness, and concubines were removed from the law. As a result, one would imagine that the current law would be less restrictive than the nation’s collective understanding on prostitution as it exists out in the open markets almost everywhere outside of the United States.

As stated by the promoted article, prostitution is defined under the law as any instance where a person engages in sexual intercourse or public sexual contact with another individual for a fee. A person who pays for prostitution does not escape the reach of the law, as the law also criminalizes the act of hiring a prostitute. Additionally, the law encompasses the purchases of sexual services online, as the definition of prostitution is broad and includes internet services.

The penalty for prostitution in Arizona is generally a class 1 misdemeanor, although repeat offenders are subject to enhanced penalties under Arizona law. Perhaps, the most aggrieving circumstance arising from this law is that individuals suing institutions under Arizona law for wrongful prosecution do not acquire jurisdiction through the courts when the Defendant can be tried in courts of continuing jurisdiction; however, there is no real substantive reason for the restriction.

To elaborate on the restrictions, the article states that the defendant “will be subject to jurisdiction only if the plaintiff proves that the cause of action arose in a forum where any of the parties are.” For this, you might imagine someone is in an Arizona brothel and files suit against the owner of the establishment in another state. The current state of the law allows the defendant to avoid virtually any liability for damages even if the law was misapplied. The problem with this is that it promotes the very sort of conduct the laws are meant to eliminate, since many of the individuals who use prostitutes have reduced liability for the behavior.

To provide additional background, the author of the article cites a case from 1969 in Arizona, which set forth the law on prostitution in Territorial Arizona. There was also an act concerning regulation of public morality known as Project No. 5. This part of the law limited prosecution of acts of prostitution to only instances where there is no other basis for prosecution of the act. While this has not been applied in the modern era, the question became what constituted a matter of public morality.

To answer that question the author of the article turns to the Supreme Court of the United States. In the case, Washington v. Glucksburg, the court states that the right to privacy is deeply rooted in this nation’s history and tradition. However, while the United States has a long standing tradition of not permitting prostitution markets to operate in cities, many people would not have a problem with decriminalizing prostitution, particularly when the activity occurs without incident.

The effect of the Arizona law has served to criminalize certain issues, which exist within the prison system, by providing no compensation for legal fees once the case has been decided. This allows the State to avoid liability for any damaging errors its agents commit; however, this is not the purpose of the law. In Arizona, this does create a concern for individual’s liberties and whether the [r]ecent efforts of several states to expand civil rights and enhance liberties. In the case of prostitution, these rights are critical because the act becomes violent or hostile when the acts occur without consent. According to the in depth guide on comprehensive understandings of prostitution laws in Arizona, these issues are further explored.