SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA — Marriott International and a local franchisee in California must face accusations of complicity in sex trafficking and human trafficking due to claims that neither party did enough to intervene and help a woman showing evident signs of being a trafficking victim, according to a federal judge.
In a lawsuit filed in August 2023 in a federal court in California, an anonymous woman alleged that her traffickers moved her between various hotels in Sacramento and the Bay Area. The complaint includes several hotel companies, including Marriott and a franchisee, for alleged violations of the Victims of Trafficking Protection Reauthorization Act.
The victim reported that her traffickers preferred hotels where they could pay in cash or with prepaid cards and were familiar with the staff. Her lawsuit also names other hotel companies, including Wyndham Hotels and Resorts.
According to the victim, there were obvious signs of human trafficking that should have alerted hotel staff. She detailed how men who were not guests would enter and leave at odd hours, while she was often found undressed, malnourished, sleep-deprived, and with visible bruises.
Additionally, the woman claimed that her trafficker would yell at and physically assault her in public areas of the hotel. She also mentioned that the staff was aware of these red flags, including evidence of illegal drug use, but did not report the suspicious activity to the police.
In an order issued on Thursday, June 20, U.S. District Judge Dale A. Drozd, appointed by Obama, dismissed the claims against Wyndham Hotels and Resorts and its franchisee, arguing that the victim had not demonstrated that the hotel staff knew or should have known about the human trafficking, as she only stayed one night at a Wyndham hotel.
Drozd also granted a motion by Marriott to dismiss some of the claims, such as the accusation that the company had an established business relationship to rent rooms to the traffickers.
However, he allowed other claims against Marriott and a franchisee to proceed, arguing that hotels like Marriott could be held liable for failing to take action when there were signs that a guest was being trafficked.
The facts of the case suggest that Marriott staff knew the victim was being trafficked and subjected to force but continued doing business with her and her traffickers, thus creating an ongoing business relationship.
Unlike other hotel chains mentioned in the case, where the victim stayed only one night, she remained at a franchised Courtyard by Marriott in Campbell, California, for three nights.
Marriott argued that it only had a “franchisor-franchisee relationship” with the Campbell Hotel, but Drozd did not accept this argument. Refusing to release the parent company, the judge noted that Marriott exercises extensive control over security procedures and payment requirements at its franchises, along with policies aimed at responding to potential human trafficking incidents.
The victim, Jane Doe, is seeking a jury trial and damages. Representatives for the victim and Marriott did not immediately respond to requests for comment.
This case highlights the responsibility hotel chains have in the fight against human trafficking. Staff must be adequately trained to identify and act on signs of sex trafficking and trafficking, ensuring the safety and protection of all guests.
