Christopher Ferguson and Max Brown authored an amicus brief on behalf of the New York Council of Defense Lawyers (“NYCDL”) in the case United States v. Cherwitz, No. 26-943 (2d Cir.), in support of the appeal filed by the leaders of the wellness group OneTaste. The case is currently on appeal before the Second Circuit.
The case involves two women who were prosecuted for conspiring to violate the federal forced labor statute, 18 U.S.C. § 1589, based on conduct they engaged in as leaders of OneTaste, a wellness group that espoused unconventional practices, such as “orgasmic meditation,” that were intended to improve its member’s physical, mental, and spiritual wellbeing and push their emotional and sexual boundaries.
The alleged victims were former OneTaste members who testified that they had been manipulated and "brainwashed" into providing labor to the group, including at times sex services, under the threat of being shunned or ostracized by other members if they left. The case was tried by Judge Diane Gujarati, who sentenced OneTaste’s founder to nine years and OneTaste’s head of sales to six and a half years in prison.
Kostelanetz’s amicus brief supported defendants’ argument that the government’s interpretation of the forced labor statute, upon which the defendants were convicted, rendered the forced labor statute unconstitutionally vague.
The amicus brief argues that the statute’s legislative history, which supports a Congressional intent to criminalize conduct that imposes conditions “akin to slavery” on objectively vulnerable individuals, as well as precedent interpreting the statute, establish that Congress never intended the statute’s provisions to apply to a group such as OneTaste, whose purported victims were educated, U.S.-citizen adults of means who were at all times free to leave the group.
Kostelanetz invoked the “constitutional avoidance doctrine” to argue that the forced labor statute, specifically its requirement that the victim face a threat of “serious harm,” must be construed narrowly to avoid the Due Process problems of lack of notice and unfettered prosecutorial discretion.
Read the full amicus brief here.
About Chris
Chris has over two decades of experience as a litigator, concentrating his practice on white-collar criminal defense as well as civil and criminal tax controversies and other regulatory enforcement matters. Chris also has extensive experience handling complex civil litigation and internal investigations.
About Max
Max’s practice focuses on white-collar criminal defense. He also represents individuals and businesses in tax controversies and commercial litigation.
