Fact or Fiction: Martha McSally Claims Her Opponent Kyrsten Sinema Supported Child Trafficking Bill

Left: U.S. Senate candidate U.S. Rep. Martha McSally (R-AZ) Right: Rep. Kyrsten Sinema (D-AZ) (Photo by Justin Sullivan/ Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images)

Representative and Senate Republican candidate for Arizona Senator Martha McSally made the claim that her Democratic challenger Kyrsten Sinema backed a bill that supported human trafficking.

Is McSally correct?

Question

Did Sinema support a bill that would enable human trafficking?

With Arizona becoming one of the key swing states for the Democrats to potentially flip the Senate, the race between McSally and Sinema has escalated as November 6th draws nearer.

One of the more important issues for voters in the border state is illegal immigration, and in a September 16th interview with Fox News, McSally said that Sinema is backing a bill that supports human trafficking.

“My opponent and every Democrat got on a bill that essentially says if you cross the border illegally, and you have a kid with you and you commit a crime, another crime within 100 miles of the border, you can’t be arrested,” McSally said. “This is essentially encouraging child trafficking and that’s what my opponent supported.”

McSally told Politifact that she is referring to the Keep Families Together Act, which was sponsored almost exclusively by Democrats.

Additionally, McSally said the Republican party in contrast was working on a similar bill that would not promote what she thinks is modern-day-slavery.

Is McSally right? Did Sinema sign on to a human trafficking bill?

Research

The Keep Families Together Act was introduced in response to end President Donald Trump’s policy that caused the separation of immigrant families.

The bill was introduced by Rep. Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) and would prevent a child illegally immigrating into the U.S. to be removed from any parent or legal guardian they came with.

However, the bill also set exceptions that would allow children to be separated from their guardians, including:

  • The child is a victim of trafficking or is at significant risk of becoming a victim of trafficking;
  • There is a strong likelihood that the adult is not the parent or legal guardian of the child; or
  • The child is in danger of abuse or neglect at the hands of the parent or legal guardian, or is a danger to themselves or others.

The bill also requires a child welfare organization to approve of the separation within 48 hours and give permission to separate the child from a parent if it’s in their best interest.

Dominique Roe-Sepowitz, an associate professor and director of the Office of Sex Trafficking Intervention Research at Arizona State University, said that she believes the bill does not aide human traffickers.

“This is much less to do with sexual exploitation and more to do with separating families,” she said.

Torunn Sinclair, a spokesperson for McSally’s campaign, said that the bill would diminish federal enforcement of immigration and make claiming children an incentive for traffickers, even if they aren’t theirs to claim.

However, David Kyle, associate professor of sociology at University of California-Davis, said that this will be something that border officers receive training to spot, and parents or guardians will be required to prove their relationship to the child.

“No matter how the law is written, law enforcement officials have laws they can invoke if there is a suspicion that the child is not with their legal guardian or parent,” Kyle said. “I don’t think anything in the bill would undercut those laws and clearly supports exceptions based on those suspicions.”

While he did raise questions about how the “independent child welfare expert” leaves him wondering how the bill would work in a practical standpoint, Kyle said that “on the face of it, I don’t see the bill facilitating child trafficking.”

Fact or Fiction

Fiction.

McSally’s claim about whether Sinema supported a bill that would help human traffickers is about as unsubstantiated as you can get. The bill has included provisions that would allow separation for suspected human trafficking victims and have that signed off with certified professionals dealing with children. The fact that the bill so clearly states this makes McSally’s statement false.

Sinema has not released any statement regarding this claim.

What do you think?

3 points

Comments

Leave a Reply
  1. Of course it is fiction.

    Republican attack ads are some of the worst fiction that you can imagine, but since nobody on the right knows how to challenge them, they constantly get away with distasteful propaganda and misleading voters.

    • Of course illegal immigrants ALWAYS carry with them the necessary documents that prove the child is who they are claimed to be and that the parent is who THEY claim to be. God! I can’t keep a straight face as I write that bullshit!! Did it ever occur to you morons that the problem at the border is just WHO THE FUCK these kids REALLY belong to? This bill won’t do shit for protecting these children or discourage their entry into this country!!!

      I couldn’t keep a straight face when I read the bullshit from Politifarce!!! My God! Who can’t see through the crap they spew other than EnormousAss in his previous comment. You fuckwits should really climb out of your basements occasionally to see the light of truth!

    • how amusing, in one of her assault ads, kirsty says she’s got the vets backs…last time i looked, the phoenix va is one of the worst around, with help support like that, they’re better off with president trump, who’s already gotten things done, with help from mcsally…enough talk but no action!!!

      • You need to examine Sinema’s voting record in Congress. She voted with Trump supported bills 59.5% of the time. Being that her older brother now in law enforcement was a Marine and her younger brother served in the US Navy, she has consistently voted to support veterans even when Trump was still a TV reality “star” pushing right wing conspiracy theories as a civilian and “grabbing women by the pussy.”

    • Republicans have lived in a post-truth world since 2009. As each lie is proven false, they return to the same sources and say “Okay, give me another one.”

  2. I think it was the Democrats Obama boarder policy to separate children from their family s which was inherited by Trump just another mess for him to clean up. You had to see the pictures of children in cages, it happened on Obamas watch.

    • Why did your thought process filter out Jeff Sessions’ May 7, 2018 public announcement of the NEW zero tolerance and family separation policy? Why did it exclude the Department of Homeland Security Solicitor General’s report that the department was unprepared for the implementation of THEIR family separation policy? They only had plans for separation and not re-uniting was the conclusion. How do you reconcile the fact that the mess occurred 1 year and 6 months AFTER Trump took the oath of office? “You used the word “think” but apparently you do not understand the concept.

  3. It is not President Trump’s law. It is the law of the United States of America. Former Pres Obama used the same law, but was not exposed by the left wing media.

  4. False claims are not the exclusive use of either part. They are both equally guilty of using negative adds and in many cases these adds come back to haunt them!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

Loading…

0

Comments

0 comments

Here’s the Contact Info for Offices of Swing Vote Senators Crucial for Kavanaugh’s Confirmation

Dem Senator Blasts Kavanaugh Testimony From Senate Floor: “This Was Either Misleading or False”