HR-4323-119
Became Public Law No: 119-73.
Sponsored by Russell Fry (R-SC)
What it does
This law creates a federal process allowing human trafficking survivors to ask a court to vacate (erase) criminal convictions and expunge (remove) arrest records for offenses that were directly caused by or related to their trafficking situation. It also allows a defendant to use their trafficking victim status as a duress defense in criminal proceedings. Existing legal aid grants may now be used to fund attorneys helping survivors seek this post-conviction relief, and the Government Accountability Office must study how many survivors use the process and what its effects are.
Who benefits
Human trafficking survivors who were arrested or convicted of crimes — such as prostitution, drug offenses, or theft — that they committed as a direct result of being trafficked. Legal aid organizations and public defenders who can now use existing grant funding to represent survivors in post-conviction proceedings. Survivors seeking employment, housing, or professional licenses who are currently blocked by criminal records tied to their trafficking.
Who is hurt
Prosecutors and courts that would face an increased caseload of motions to vacate and expunge records, requiring additional administrative resources. Crime victims or their families in cases where a trafficking survivor's conviction is vacated, who may view the erasure of the record as diminishing accountability. State governments that have their own vacatur laws may face pressure to align with or defer to the new federal standard. Taxpayers who fund the GAO study, expanded legal aid use, and court processing costs.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue that human trafficking survivors are victims, not criminals, and that convictions for offenses committed under coercion create a permanent punishment that compounds the original harm of trafficking. A criminal record blocks survivors from jobs, housing, and public benefits — making it harder to rebuild their lives and easier for traffickers to maintain control through the threat of legal consequences. Because traffickers often deliberately engineer situations where victims commit crimes, those convictions reflect the trafficker's conduct, not the survivor's free choice. Allowing vacatur and expungement corrects a systemic injustice, and the duress defense provision ensures future defendants can present this evidence at trial rather than after the fact. The GAO oversight requirement ensures the program is evaluated on evidence, not assumption.
Opponents argue
Opponents argue that creating a broad federal vacatur process risks erasing convictions in cases where the trafficking connection is weak, exaggerated, or difficult to verify after the fact, potentially undermining the integrity of prior court proceedings. They contend that 40+ states already have their own vacatur laws tailored to local legal systems, making a federal overlay duplicative and potentially disruptive to state criminal justice frameworks under anti-commandeering principles. Critics also raise concerns that the duress defense provision, if applied broadly, could be used to challenge convictions in cases involving serious offenses, and that the burden of proof standards for establishing trafficking victim status at the motion stage may be insufficiently rigorous. Finally, expanding grant eligibility for post-conviction relief diverts limited legal aid resources away from other underserved populations.