Human trafficking, a criminal offense resulting in the exploitation of people, is increasingly facilitated by new technologies. Similarly, the anti-trafficking framework and its actors are evolving to modernize their strategies and policies. In particular, states and digital actors appear at the crossroads of the repression of trafficking and the regulation of cyberspace. As both seek to participate in this fight, the theory of sovereignty is challenged. Indeed, the repression of cyber human trafficking requires research into who exercises coercion, particularly to establish the obligations of states as sovereigns, and the existence of new sovereigns, specifically to question the role of digital actors. Consequently, when various sovereigns emerge, this study focuses on the order of coercion between them, particularly the strategies they develop and their impact on the repression of cyber human trafficking. Instead of a demonstration in favor of its demise, this study aims to rethink the basis of the theory of sovereignty to offer a new perspective on its application, using the repression of cyber human trafficking as a case study. This study reveals that sovereignty can be applied outside the framework of the state and that relationships of coercion and collaboration are being developed between sovereign entities, challenging the notion of independence as the basis for sovereignty. If sovereignty is linked to the exercise of coercion, it can then be disconnected from the state. This disconnection clearly appears as a result of the limitations of the state in implementing it when digital actors exercise coercion over data. Indeed, various sources of coercion appear in the repression of cyber trafficking and are needed to protect the victims and convict the perpetrators. Consequently, various types of relationships can be drawn between sovereigns. First, imposing coercion between sovereigns hinders the independent exercise of coercion and the effective repression of trafficking. Second, collaboration between sovereigns arises as a strategy to protect each other’s sovereignty and to head toward a comprehensive repression of cyber trafficking. This mindset is particularly developed outside of criminal law. As a result, digital actors are intermediaries in the implementation of human rights, and states are intermediaries for digital actors by lending them guidance and tools to legitimize their actions. However, partly due to a traditional understanding of sovereignty and a mainly neoliberal approach to the business sector, this interconnectedness is negated under the current theory of sovereignty. Its traditional basis, independence, challenges the implementation and legitimization of norms, particularly human rights and anti-trafficking frameworks. Accordingly, a complementary criterion could legitimizesovereignty: interdependence. Thus, this study offers a new perspective on sovereignty and adapts it to the current societal environment. The role of the law is also questioned. This study on the legal tools to repress cyber trafficking highlights a downgrade in the quality of the law, specifically criminal law, which is seen as a tool to solve social problems. The law is magnified as a solution, in particular, to challenges derived from technologies, leading to legal solutionism.