Editing Mann Act (section)

==Effects and alterations of the Mann Act==
The Mann Act was one of the more salient legislation passed during the early 20th century [[Progressive Era]]. While the Mann Act was meant to combat forced prostitution, it had repercussions that extended into consensual sexual activity, including criminalizing many people who were not participating in prostitution. It was also abused for political persecution and as a tool for blackmail.<ref name="PBS Mann" />

The scope of the Mann Act was expanded in September 1913, as a result of charges brought against Drew Caminetti and Maury Diggs, both of Sacramento, California. The two men were married, and took their mistresses (Lola Norris and Marsha Warrington, respectively) to Reno, Nevada. The men's wives contacted the police, and the men were arrested in Reno and found guilty under the Mann Act.<ref name="PBS Mann">{{cite web |last1=Burns |first1=Ken |title=The Mann Act |url=https://www.pbs.org/kenburns/unforgivable-blackness/mann-act/ |website=www.pbs.com |publisher=Public Broadcasting Service |access-date=2 March 2025 |language=en}}</ref> 

<blockquote>Such an interpretation of the law in effect criminalized all premarital or extramarital sexual relationships that involved interstate travel. With behavior that was so commonplace now illegal, federal prosecutors had a weapon that could very easily be abused in order to prosecute "undesirables" who were otherwise law-abiding citizens.<ref name="PBS Mann" /></blockquote>
[[File:Jack and Lucille Johnson.jpg|thumb|[[Jack Johnson (boxer)|Jack Johnson]] marries Lucille Cameron, 1912]]
"Undesirables" included black men who had consensual premarital affairs or married women who weren't black, as well as men with perceived left-of-center political views. For example, the heavyweight champion of the world, Jack Johnson, as well as Charlie Chaplin, and later, [[Chuck Berry]] were all prosecuted and convicted under the Mann Act. The instigating circumstances resulting in prosecution were that Johnson married a white woman,<ref>{{cite web |last1=Burns |first1=Ken |title=Johnson's Arrest |url=https://www.pbs.org/kenburns/unforgivable-blackness/johnsons-arrest |website=Unforgivable Blackness: The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson |publisher=[[PBS]] |access-date=2 March 2025 |language=en}}</ref> Chaplin had a premarital relationship with a 24 year old actress then later paid her train fare home (crossing over state lines), and Berry paid for transportation of an underage [[Apache]] girl to her home, across state lines.<ref name="PBS Mann" /><ref name="Reference A">{{cite web |last1=Burns |first1=Ken |title=The Rise and Fall of Jack Johnson |url=https://www.pbs.org/unforgivableblackness/knockout/mann.html |website=Unforgivable Blackness |publisher=PBS |access-date=2 March 2025 |language=en}}</ref>

Following multiple blackmail accounts, ''[[The New York Times]]'' became an advocate against the Mann Act. In 1915, the paper published an editorial pointing out how the Act led to extortion. In 1916, it labeled the Mann Act "The Blackmail Act", arguing that its dangers had been clear from the start as the Act could make a harmless spree or simple [[elopement]] a crime. The paper also called the "blackmail that resulted from the Mann Act [...] worse than the prostitution it sought to suppress".<ref name=McLaren/> 

One author wrote about an incident of blackmail in 1914. A woman met a U.S. Army colonel in Los Angeles and was his mistress for two years. He promised to divorce his wife and marry her. When the colonel decided to leave her and return to his wife in Providence, Rhode Island, his former mistress and her mother pursued him there. The two women consulted lawyers and then the former mistress unsuccessfully tried to bring charges against him under the Mann Act, attempting to bribe an official to assist in her favor.<ref name=McLaren>McLaren, Angus. "Entrapping the Jazz-Age American Male." ''Sexual Blackmail: A Modern History''. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard University Press, 2002. page 87. Print.</ref>

While the Mann Act has never been repealed, it has been amended and altered since its initial passing. The Mann Act continued essentially unchanged until 1978 amendments that expanded coverage to issues around child pornography and exploitation. Most recently, in 1986, the Mann Act was significantly altered to make the whole Act gender neutral and to redress the specific ambiguous phrasing that had enabled decades of unjust applications of the Act. With the 1986 amendments, the Mann Act outlaws interstate or foreign transport of "any person" for purposes of "any sexual activity for which any person can be charged with a criminal offense."<ref>Langum, David J. "Mann Act (1910)." Major Acts of Congress. 2004. Encyclopedia.com. November 14, 2013 <http://www.encyclopedia.com></ref><ref name="Reference A" /> Prior to the [[Supreme Court of the United States|Supreme Court]] ruling in ''[[Lawrence v. Texas]]'' (2003), old laws still in effect in many states made [[sodomy laws|sodomy illegal]], which left open the possibility of prosecution under the Mann Act of consenting adult couples, especially gay couples, though there is no record of such enforcement actions.<ref name=Langum1994/>

By 2024, both the terms "White Slave Traffic Act" and the "Mann Act" had fallen out of use although the associated law continues to be enforced.<ref>{{cite web |last=Cevallos |first=Danny |url=https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/sean-diddy-combs-charged-mann-act-freak-offs-rcna172076 |title=The checkered origins of the law at the center of Sean 'Diddy' Combs' prosecution |publisher=[[MSNBC]] |date=2024-09-22 |access-date=2024-09-22}}</ref>