Erotic Service Provider Legal Education and Research Project v. Gascon
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
880 F.3d 450 (2018)
- Written by Mike Begovic, JD
Facts
Erotic Service Provider Legal Education and Research Project, several former erotic-service providers, and one potential client wanting to use an erotic-service provider (collectively, ESP) (plaintiffs) challenged California’s ban on prostitution. ESP filed a complaint seeking declaratory and injunctive relief against several district attorneys and the California attorney general (collectively, the state) (defendants), seeking to enjoin and invalidate California’s ban on prostitution (the ban). The ban made it a misdemeanor to knowingly solicit or engage in an act of prostitution. Prostitution was defined as any lewd act performed for money or other services. ESP argued that the ban violated constitutional rights, including: (1) Fourteenth Amendment due process; (2) the right to earn a living; (3) First Amendment freedom of speech; and (4) First Amendment freedom of association. The state of California maintained that the ban was needed to prevent human trafficking and the spread of infectious diseases. The district court found a strong connection between these problems and California’s ban. The district court dismissed all of ESP’s claims. ESP appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Restani, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

