[JURIST] The US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit [official website] on Thursday unanimously struck down [opinion, PDF] a constitutional challenge to a California law [text] that criminalizes prostitution.

The lawsuit was brought by three self-acknowledged prostitutes, a potential client who wished “to engage an ‘erotic service provider’ for [their] services” and Erotic Service Provider Legal Education and Research Project (ESPLER) [advocacy website], a sex workers’ advocacy group. The plaintiffs claimed that the law violated their First and Fourteenth Amendment rights to freedom of association, due process, right to earn a living, right to free speech and the right to sexual privacy as articulated in Lawrence v. Texas [opinion, PDF]. ESPLER and their fellow plaintiffs argued that Lawrence “guarantees to consent adults a fundamental liberty interest to engage in the private sexual activity, and the State cannot wholly outlaw a commercial exchange related to the exercise of such a liberty interest.

However, the Ninth Circuit stated that Lawrence clearly stated that “[t]his case does not involve minors, person who might be injured or coerced, those who might not easily refuse consent, or public conduct or prostitution.” The court found that Lawrence applies only to “highly personal relationships” and that prostitution falls outside of the intimate conduct protected by Lawrence.

In concluding the opinion, the court stated that the plaintiff’s claims “may yet convince the California legislature to change its mind. But this court cannot change its mind for them.”

In a press release [text], ESPLER’s attorney stated:

We’re mindful that, in our nation’s history, other constitutional issues have taken a persistent and continuing effort until the courts get it right. This case is not over and we are seriously considering requesting a rehearing by the full court. This is an important issue that affects all Americans, and it deserves further consideration by the courts.

Plaintiffs will now attempt to have the matter reheard by the full panel of the court.