At Andreozzi + Foote, our mission has always been clear: hold traffickers accountable and ensure that victims are treated with dignity. We do not want them punished for their exploitation. The newly introduced bills in Michigan present a pivotal moment. They offer a chance to align Michigan with states that have already adopted strong, victim-centered human trafficking laws. Moreover, they aim to avoid the mistakes others made when reforms lacked clarity or inflicted unintended harm on survivors.

A snapshot of successful state frameworks

Before we turn to Michigan, it helps to look at what other states are doing right. These examples show the model we believe every state should follow: punish the perpetrator, protect the victim, enable civil redress, and provide trauma-informed support.

California

Under California’s Penal Code § 236.1(a), anyone who deprives or violates another’s personal liberty with intent to obtain forced labor or services commits human trafficking. The penalties vary depending on circumstances: for acts involving minors or commercial sex, sentences can escalate to life in prison and fines up to $500,000.
Importantly, California has made clear that trafficked minors are victims (even if no force is shown) and has laws directed at protecting, not penalizing, them. 

This blend of strong criminal law + victim protection reflects our approach at Andreozzi + Foote.

Illinois

Illinois has taken meaningful steps in both prosecution and support. Its statute covers trafficking in persons and involuntary servitude. A recent reform, the Illinois Statewide Trauma-Informed Response to Human Trafficking Act (Senate Bill 2323), institutes coordinated services, victim‐centered care, and enhanced penalties for trafficking (especially child labor trafficking). It also eliminates the statute of limitations for civil actions by minor victims. In civil law, Illinois allows victims to bring lawsuits under the Trafficking Victims Protection Act (740 Ill. Comp. Stat. Ann. 128) seeking damages, including punitive, from traffickers.

Illinois shows how criminal accountability and civil remedies can work hand‐in‐hand.

Key takeaways from these states
From these models we observe:

• Clear statutory definitions of trafficking (including labor and sex trafficking), distinguishing perpetrators from victims.
• Substantial criminal penalties for traffickers, especially when minors are involved.
• Civil remedies for victims to hold perpetrators (and sometimes complicit entities) accountable.
• Support structures: trauma‐informed care, interagency coordination, and an emphasis on victims rather than criminalizing them.
• Laws prevent victims from being prosecuted for acts directly tied to their exploitation. For example, prostitution charges when the person was trafficked. Illinois provides immediate sealing of records for those whose offense was a direct result of trafficking.
• Enhanced training for service providers and law enforcement to identify and handle trafficking appropriately.

These features define what a strong state anti-trafficking statute should look like.

Michigan’s proposed bills and how they compare

In Michigan, a bipartisan package of bills (SB 520 through SB 524) has been introduced to enhance the state’s human-trafficking laws. Michigan’s provisions include: increasing penalties for traffickers, raising the age at which a victim is considered a child from 16 to 18, and signaling that trafficking a child may result in a life sentence. 

These are positive developments. Michigan has a high incidence of trafficking: it ranked among the states with the highest number of confirmed trafficking cases in 2024.

However, the bills also include provisions that raise concern among advocates. Some bills allow authorities to remove children from a parent’s care if that parent is convicted of trafficking, even when the parent was also a victim. Advocates warn that without precise language, the legislation could still permit prosecutors to charge victims for crimes connected to their own trafficking a mistake other states have already made.

Here’s how Michigan’s proposals stack up against the benchmarks from other states:

• Michigan proposes stronger penalties for traffickers. That aligns with the best practice.
• Raises the victim age threshold to 18 which helps recognize the adult fac­tors of trafficking among young adults.
• What is less clear (from public reporting) is whether Michigan’s bills sufficiently protect victims from prosecution for acts tied to their exploitation. It is uncertain whether they create robust civil remedies and comprehensive trauma-informed support.
• The concern about parental rights consequences suggests potential unintended harm to victims or survivors who are themselves parents. Differing from states like Illinois where protections exist to prevent victims from being further victimized by the system.

It Matters

Michigan has an opportunity to close critical gaps by expanding civil remedies for victims, protecting survivors from prosecution for crimes tied to their trafficking, building trauma-informed support systems, and holding corporate and institutional facilitators accountable.

But to truly succeed, Michigan must ensure several critical elements:

1. Victim protection over victim prosecution
Too often, the justice system charges victims with prostitution, solicitation, or drug offenses directly tied to their trafficking. Illinois immediately seals records when an offense results from being trafficked. Michigan must implement similar safeguards to prevent the system from re-victimizing survivors

2. Civil remedies for survivors
Perpetrators must face not only criminal sentences but civil liability. States where victims can sue traffickers (and profit from knowing their revenue) create strong deterrents and paths to healing. Michigan’s bills must incorporate robust civil provisions, including a meaningful statute of limitations or elimination of one, just as Illinois did. The Michigan proposal would benefit from this dimension.

3. Trauma-informed support services
Successful state laws go beyond criminal penalties. They create coordinated agency responses, training, task forces, and funding for survivor services. Illinois’ recent law is a model of this. Michigan must likewise ensure the infrastructure for prevention, identification, victim assistance, and long-term recovery.

4. Corporate and institutional accountability
Trafficking often operates through institutional means (labor recruitment, hospitality, agriculture, transportation). States like Illinois impose obligations on businesses (notice posting, training). Michigan should incorporate industry accountability — not only criminalizing traffickers but also holding complicit entities to account.

5. Clarity to avoid unintended consequences
The concern raised in Michigan hearings about removing children from the care of parents who are themselves victims highlights a risk: poor drafting can penalize the wrong person. Michigan must craft its laws so they target true perpetrators and protect victim-parents.

A call to action for Michigan

Michigan stands at a crossroads. If the bills pass as drafted, they would mark a substantial improvement. This includes increasing penalties for traffickers, expanding the definition of child victims, and elevating the state’s response to trafficking. But the law’s promise must ensure that:

• victims are centered in every decision,
• perpetrators are held accountable at the highest levels,
• survivors are supported, not criminalized,
• civil justice is available to hold exploiters to account, and
• systemic change in agencies and institutions is supported and funded.

At Andreozzi + Foote, we believe that trafficking is not only a crime it is a violation of human worth. These bills represent hope for victims in Michigan. They offer a chance for the state to step into anti‐trafficking reform. But hope must translate into law that leaves no gap.

Our firm stands ready to help with legal advocacy, civil remedies, and support to reclaim your life.