Legal resistance to sex robots

Abstract

This article explores the dynamic and the implications for the legal response to sex robots, using the United States legal system as a case study. This article does not try to cover all legal aspects of sex with robots, but rather focuses on likely legal strategies to prohibit or restrict sex robots. The American legal system has traditionally followed a two-step approach to non-traditional sexual practices, typified by an initial effort to prohibit such practices to protect “public morality,” followed by a subsequent period of relaxation and non-enforcement. This pattern will likely apply to sex robots, where some state legislatures will likely seek to ban sex robots outright, but may encounter Constitutional obstacles and the unwillingness of law enforcement to expend significant resources enforcing against such “victimless crimes.” More focused prohibitions that go beyond public morality arguments and seek to protect arguably legitimate interests will have greater salience. Examples include prohibitions on child sex robots that may be used to promote pedophilia, the recognition of human-robot marriage that could weaken the unique human bonds that sanctify marriage, and sex robot brothels that could debase and damage neighborhoods. However, even these more legitimate goals in restricting certain applications of sex robots are likely to encounter legal obstacles under U.S. constitutional law, and thus likely follow the two-step dynamic seen for other non-traditional sexual practices of initial attempts at legal prohibition followed by relaxation of enforcement and implicit acceptance.