So to be pedantic (because that matters with legal cases) she is not suing him for human trafficking. She is suing him for intensely abusive employment conditions, including underpayment, overwork, harassment during attempts to take breaks or leave the city, psychological torment, and housing conditions which conspired to keep her from leaving, which can very reasonably be said to constitute a degree of human trafficking. But the suit is not specifically pressing trafficking charges.
That said the degree of racist and sexual harassment alleged (from his mom) is horrifying and deserves specific attention.
Actually, I think this is worth emphasizing. While human trafficking charges are not being filed, the allegations absolutely represent a pattern of human trafficking control. Sleep and food deprivation, constant surveillance, economic deprivation, housing control, continuous harassment, all of these are behaviors desgined to keep someone burned out and with no time to make moves to get themself out.
Someone living in a city they’re unfamiliar with, with San Francisco’s housing market, no time to establish connections with locals, withheld wages and illegal lies about what wages would be coming, who is constantly sleep deprived and hungry, and harassed constantly by their captor who reacts with extreme measures to moves which might let them leave (like taking a trip out of the city), is how not in a position to leave their job. Pedantry is important in legal matters, but we can recognize when something is absolutely being described in allegations and not on a list of charges only for practical reasons of ease of prosecution.
