It’s been 50 days since the US government locked up Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz, two women convicted during a sham trial of a little-known charge called “forced labor conspiracy.” Most Americans have never even heard of it, and for good reason. This vague, elastic statute was never meant for cases like this. These women weren’t accused of abuse, trafficking, or violence of any kind. They were targeted for running a spiritual wellness company built around adult, consensual meditation practices.
On June 8, 2025, a Brooklyn jury returned a verdict that should send a chill through every educator, spiritual leader, and entrepreneur in America. With zero evidence of any sort of confinement, threats, or violence, Daedone and Cherwitz were found guilty of “forced labor conspiracy.” This is a charge usually reserved for sweatshops, not spiritual schools and meditation groups. But that didn’t matter, because this case wasn’t about justice. It was ideological “MeToo-era” lawfare dressed up as prosecution and rubber-stamped by the Eastern District of New York.
The June 8, 2025, conviction in the Brooklyn federal courthouse of Nicole Daedone and Rachel Cherwitz, co-founder and former sales executive, respectively, of the sexual wellness company OneTaste, marks a significant development in a controversial case that has drawn national attention.
The verdict, which found the wellness educators guilty of a single count of forced labor conspiracy, a crime typically associated with sweatshop operators and sex traffickers, relied on novel legal theories that could have far-reaching implications for educators, religious leaders, and community organizers who engage in intensive one-on-one interactions with dedicated students or followers. OneTaste, founded in San Francisco in 2004, gained prominence for its unconventional wellness practices centered around “orgasmic meditation,” which the company claimed could lead to personal growth, empowerment, and heightened intimacy.
However, in April 2023, following a series of critical media reports and a salacious Netflix documentary, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of New York indicted Daedone and Cherwitz on a single count of conspiracy to obtain forced labor. Notably, prosecutors did not charge any substantive counts of forced labor or sex trafficking, instead relying on a novel application of the conspiracy statute. The case against Daedone and Cherwitz raised eyebrows from the start.
Prosecutors alleged that the defendants had used psychological coercion and manipulation to compel participants’ labor and commitment, despite no evidence of physical confinement, violence, or overt threats. Over the course of the five-week trial, which began on May 5, 2025, the government presented testimony from nine former OneTaste staff and students who claimed to have felt pressured to devote increasing time and resources to the organization. A Verdict Built on Contradictions The trial’s outcome crystallized a fundamental paradox:
How can voluntary participation in educational programs constitute forced labor? All nine of the government’s complaining witnesses testified they received valuable benefits from OneTaste’s teachings on meditation and sexuality. No evidence showed physical restraint, prevented departure, or traditional markers of coercion. Indeed, prosecutor Nina Gupta conceded in closing: “There may not have been physical chains holding the victims in place. There may not have been locks on the door.” Instead, the government argued that losing “your job or your friends or your family or your belief system” constituted serious harm under the forced labor statute – establishing a precedent that could criminalize any religious community, athletic program, or dedicated community where participants develop deep commitments.
Yet after two days of deliberation, the jury returned a guilty verdict for each defendant. The immediate remand by the court of both defendants – after two years of full bail compliance – added theatrical punctuation to what attorneys following the case characterized as a “show trial.” Judge Diane Gujarati cited media coverage as justification for detention, though that same media attention had existed throughout their pretrial release.
Hellbound and Down 