Navigating Health and Police Harassment: Implications of Condom Carrying Practices for People in the Sex Trade Post-SB233

Background and Purpose: Our study investigates sex worker interactions with law enforcement post-
passage of California Senate Bill (SB) 233, a law decriminalizing condom possession and granting limited
immunity from prosecution to sex workers. We sought to explore sex worker experiences related to use
of condoms as evidence in criminalizing sex work. We also looked at syndemic factors related to
violence and victimization and criminalization to better understand HIV disparities among people
engaged in the sex work. In California, Los Angeles County (LAC) is the locus for enforcement of an HIV
felony solicitation law that criminalized people living with HIV who engaged in or were suspected of
engaging in sex work. This study sought to explore narratives from people engaged in sex work in LAC,
with a focus on the role of condoms used as evidence of sex work.

Methods: All procedures were conducted in compliance with the institutional review board of UCLA.
Outreach and recruitment efforts included developing recruitment materials in English and Spanish
grounded in sex worker culture, distributing palm cards to a dozen organizational partners serving sex
workers across LAC, and presenting information about the study at community meetings and events.
The study included participation in a one-time semi-structured anonymous interview over Zoom.
Interviews were collected from February 2021 through August, 2022. In total, thirty-nine individuals
(n=39) were screened for interviews, thirty-three (n=33) were deemed eligible to participate, and twenty-five individuals (n=25) successfully completed the interviews. On average, interviews lasted
approximately one hour. Respondents received $100 for participating in the study.

Results/Outcomes: Through a group thematic review and individual coding (or categorizing) process, we
identified key findings. Respondents discussed their perceptions about the risks to criminalization
related to condoms in three distinct ways: (1) detailed knowledge about rules and policies related to
condom carrying; (2) general awareness of possible risk to carrying condoms; and (3) sources of
information about criminalization as it relates to condom possession. Respondents discussed
approaches to mitigating risk of police surveillance by either not carrying condoms at all and/or
managing condom carrying through concealing techniques. Some respondents who carried condoms,
whether they tried to conceal them or not, discussed reasons for doing so, including resisting police
control and reducing risk to protect their health, the health of their clients, and/or the health of their
community and colleagues in the sex trade. Generally, most respondents had not heard of any new law
that restricted the use of condoms as evidence (SB 233). Further, reflecting the lack of awareness of the
new law, condom carrying behaviors seemed relatively unchanged. Notably, most respondents carried
condoms regardless of the risk of criminalization.

Conclusions: Findings point to future opportunities to support the resilience demonstrated by sex
workers themselves, including their determination to carry condoms and protect their health and the
health of others. While evaluating the implementation and adherence to SB233 among law enforcement
remains critical post-passage of SB 233, aligning future implementation efforts with sex worker-led
advocacy efforts might yield greater impact—as respondents largely reported receiving information
from other members of their community, including other sex workers.