In a break from progressives, Newsom says soliciting older minors for sex should be a felony

Los Angeles Times - Apr 30th, 2025

California Governor Gavin Newsom expressed his support for a bill that aims to elevate the punishment to a felony for soliciting sex from 16- or 17-year-olds. This move came after the bill was altered by Democratic members of the state Assembly, who removed the felony charge relating to older minors. Newsom, who rarely comments before a bill reaches his desk, emphasized that all sex predators targeting minors should face felony charges. His stance highlights a divergence from his party, as he has previously intervened to advocate for harsher penalties for sex crimes against minors. The bill aimed to expand existing laws against soliciting minors and loitering with the intent to buy sex.

The Democratic decision to water down the bill and prevent it from advancing without amendments prompted criticism about the party's priorities. Assemblymember Maggy Krell, who sponsored the bill, was pressured to remove the felony provision for older teens. The controversy sparked debate during committee hearings and on social media, with some lawmakers arguing for stronger protections for minors. The Democrats defended their actions, stating that further hearings on the issue will be held. This legislative tussle underscores the ongoing complexities and challenges in balancing punitive measures with criminal justice reform in California.

Legislation Political Controversy Gavin Newsom Sex Crimes California Assembly Felony Charges Maggy Krell

Story submitted by Fairstory

RATING

7.0

Fair Story

Consider it well-founded

The article provides a timely and largely accurate account of a significant legislative issue involving Gov. Gavin Newsom's support for increased penalties for soliciting minors. It effectively covers the political dynamics and potential impacts on public policy, making it relevant to a wide audience. The clarity and structure of the article are strengths, though it could benefit from more diverse sourcing and deeper exploration of opposing viewpoints to enhance balance and transparency. The topic's controversy and public interest potential are well-handled, making it an engaging piece that could influence public discourse and policy decisions.

Accuracy

The story presents several claims that are largely accurate and verifiable. Gov. Gavin Newsom's support for felony charges against those soliciting 16- and 17-year-olds is well-documented, reflecting his stance against his party's amendments. The current legal framework, which distinguishes penalties for different age groups, is accurately described, with the distinction that soliciting minors under 16 is a felony, while 16- and 17-year-olds require specific conditions for felony charges. The article correctly notes the legislative process, including the Democrats' decision to block the bill unless amended, and the political reactions from both parties. However, verification of committee hearing details and the specific legal nuances concerning the "wobbler" status for under-16s are necessary for complete accuracy.

Balance

The article provides a balanced view by presenting perspectives from both sides of the political aisle. Gov. Newsom's position and the Democrats' rationale for amending the bill are outlined, alongside Republican criticisms. However, the article could improve by including more detailed arguments from the Democrats who opposed the felony charges for 16- and 17-year-olds, which would provide a fuller understanding of their reasoning. The emphasis on Republican criticism might give an impression of bias against the Democrats' decision.

Clarity

The article is clear and concise, with a logical flow from Gov. Newsom's position to the legislative process and political reactions. The language is straightforward, and the structure helps readers understand the key points. However, some legal nuances, such as the definition of a "wobbler" offense, could be explained more clearly for readers unfamiliar with legal terminology.

Source quality

The article cites statements from Gov. Newsom and Assemblymember Tom Lackey, providing some level of authority. However, it lacks direct quotes or detailed insights from the Democrats who opposed the bill, which could enhance the reliability of the reporting. The reliance on political figures as primary sources is typical for such stories but could be supplemented with expert opinions or legal analyses to strengthen the article's foundation.

Transparency

The article is transparent about Gov. Newsom's unusual involvement in the legislative process and the legislative amendments. However, it lacks detailed explanations of the methodology behind the Democrats' decision and the specific legal implications of the proposed changes. Providing more context about the legislative process and the potential impact of the bill would enhance transparency.