Argues that HIV criminalization laws impute a host of assumptions about the HIV-positive community and their sexual partners, suggesting social scientists and legislators should reassess the evidence that purportedly undergirds characterizations of HIV-positive persons as dangerous liaisons with cruel intentions.
The harms of HIV criminalization: responding to the ‘association of HIV diagnosis rates and laws criminalizing HIV exposure in the United States’
Critiques findings from CDC research suggesting criminal exposure laws have had no detectable HIV prevention effect, arguing that by taking account of social science research, even stronger conclusions about the harms of HIV exposure laws are possible.
HIV Criminalization in California: What We Know
Highlights significant findings about Californian criminal law including that more than 800 people have come in contact with California’s criminal system based on their HIV status, with 93% of convictions requiring no proof of conduct likely to transmit HIV. Also finds HIV criminal statutes are disparately enforced based on race/ethnicity, sexuality and gender.
A Legal Toolkit: Resources for Attorneys Handling HIV-Related Prosecutions
This toolkit produced by the Center for HIV Law and Policy (CHLP) for the Positive Justice Project in 2013, provides multiple resources (including case law, legal analysis and scientific data) for lawyers representing people facing HIV criminalisation, and other advocates.
Association of HIV diagnosis rates and laws criminalizing HIV exposure in the United States
This study assessed the relationship between HIV and AIDS diagnosis data from the (US) National HIV Surveillance System and the presence of a state criminal exposure law by using generalized estimating equations. It found no association between HIV or AIDS diagnosis rates and criminal exposure laws across states over time, suggesting that these laws have had no detectable HIV prevention effect.
Testimony of Donald Bogardus, Kerry Thomas, Robert Suttle, Louis Gay, Mark Hunter, Monique Moree and Nick Rhoades
In individual videos, seven survivors of HIV criminalisation tell their compelling first-hand accounts of prosecution and incarcertion for HIV non-disclosure.
Spit Does Not Transmit: A Fact Sheet for Law Enforcement Personnel, The Center for HIV Law and Policy, the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives and the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys (2013)
This 2013 factsheet produced by the Center for HIV Law and Policy, the National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives and the Association of Prosecuting Attorneys provides current factual information about the HIV transmission risks law enforcement professionals may face in the line of duty (aiming to address the frequent overstating of risk). States there is no known case of a law enforcement officer being infected in the line of duty through spitting or biting.
Routes, Risks and Realities of HIV Transmission and Care: Current Scientific Knowledge and Medical Treatment
This factsheet from the Center for HIV & Law Policy, published in 2017, outlines HIV transmission risk (based on “HIV Medicine and Science: Transmission Considerations”).
Amicus Curiae brief of Lambda Legal Defense and Education Fund, Inc., Community AIDS Resource and Education Services, Michigan Positive Action Coalition, and Michigan Protection and Advocacy Service Inc.
Urges court to drop a bioterrorism charge against an HIV positive man who bit his neighbour during an argument, explaining the facts about HIV transmission risk. The bioterrorism charges were dropped.
Best Practices Guide to Reform HIV-Specific Criminal Laws to Align with Scientifically-Supported Factors
Provides technical assistance to states wanting to re-examine HIV-specific criminal laws to ensure that existing policies “do not place unique or additional burdens on individuals living with HIV/AIDS” and that policies “reflect contemporary understanding of HIV transmission routes and associated benefits of treatment.”