Sex Cult Leaders Convicted of Forced Labor Now Lobby Trump for Pardons

Two former leaders of OneTaste, a company promoting so-called "orgasmic meditation," are pushing for presidential pardons after federal convictions for forced labor conspiracy. Nicole Daedone, the founder and ex-CEO, was sentenced to nine years in prison, while Rachel Cherwitz, former head of sales, received over six years. Their convictions stem from a 2025 trial where prosecutors detailed how the organization preyed on vulnerable women under the guise of wellness.

OneTaste’s practice involved the ritualized stroking of a woman’s clitoris for 15 minutes, marketed as a path to empowerment. But the government exposed a darker reality: women were coerced into sexual acts with investors and other members, threatened with social exile and loss of housing if they resisted. Assistant U.S. Attorney Sean Fern called it "exploitation masqueraded as empowerment," highlighting the criminal enterprise Daedone led.

Despite overwhelming evidence and victim testimonies describing trauma, debt, and depression, the group is now aggressively lobbying allies within Trump’s orbit. They have sought help from Alan Dershowitz, the controversial lawyer known for securing clemency favors from Trump during his presidency. Dershowitz framed the case as a dangerous precedent that could threaten religious groups, though prosecutors reject the notion that this is about beliefs rather than criminal conduct.

OneTaste’s current CEO, Anjuli Ayer, called the sentencing "a terrifying day for freedom," warning that criminalizing persuasion and disregarding consent endangers everyone. The company also found support from conservative activist Douglass Mackey, who successfully overturned his own conviction related to election misinformation.

Judge Dianne Gujarati, who handed down the sentences, condemned Daedone’s lack of remorse and exploitation of women for profit. Daedone must forfeit $12 million—the amount she sold OneTaste for—and pay nearly $900,000 to victims. Her attorney insists they will appeal and hinted that a pardon would be a fitting use of presidential power, though she declined to comment directly on clemency efforts.

This case spotlights how Trump’s pardon power continues to be weaponized to protect the powerful and shield abuses, rewarding loyalty and influence over justice. As the pardon application lingers with the Justice Department, the victims’ voices and the broader implications for accountability hang in the balance.