The Legal System - Hate-crime Overview

Ignoble acts associated with intolerance and bigotry — the worst of which constitute what we now call hate crimes — have always been with us, but the anti-hate-crime movement is a recent phenomenon. It grew out of the Civil Rights movement of the 1950s and 1960s, which was a reaction to hate violence in the South. Congress responded with a flurry of antidiscrimination legislation, including the Civil Rights Act of 1964. After three young men working to register black voters in Mississippi were turned over by police to the Ku Klux Klan and were subsequently found murdered, the Civil Rights Act of 1968 was passed. It included language that criminalized acts committed against someone because of his or her race, religion, or nationality.

That legislation and highly publicized atrocities (just a few of which appear in the time-line) gave momentum to advocates for other groups, including religious, women, ethnics, lesbian/gay/bisexual/transgendered individuals (LGBT), and the disabled, who sought the passage of federal, state, and local laws affording special punishments for crimes committed because of a person's affiliation with the group. At the federal level, though, as of the time of writing (November 2002), the 1968 criminal statute covering crimes based on race, religion, and national origin remained the standard.

The meaning of hate crime, how it differs from "ordinary crime," what types of people and institutions should be protected by hate-crime legislation, whether we need such legislation at all — these are topics of passionate debate. The numerous pieces of hate-crime legislation proposed at the federal and state levels have met with varying degrees of success. Supporters frequently mention the symbolic importance of passing hate-crime legislation, regardless of what such laws may actually do. In an address to Congress at the first hate-crime hearing in 1985, Representative John Conyers, Jr. said that hate-crime legislation "will carry to offenders, to victims, and to society at large an important message, that the Nation is committed to battling the violent manifestations of bigotry."

At the state level, Massachusetts passed the nation's first hate crime law in 1979 after riots broke out over court-ordered busing. The Massachusetts Civil Rights Act protected civil rights without regard to status characteristics (e.g., race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation). In 1981 the Anti-Defamation League drafted model hate-crime legislation (1) to address vandalism against churches, cemeteries, and public institutions, and (2) to enhance penalties for crimes based on a victim's perceived or actual religion, race, or national origin. Sexual orientation and gender were later added to the model.¹⁸ By 1999, 47 states had adopted some type of hate-crime legislation. Most states used the ADL model but did not adopt it wholesale. For example, New Jersey's law includes gender (and disability), but Pennsylvania's does not. About 20 states do not protect individuals based on sexual orientation.¹⁹ This issue is controversial, which is not surprising considering that some of those states still have anti-sodomy laws on the books.

At the federal level, four hate-crime bills have been introduced in Congress since 1990. Three passed. The winners: The Hate Crime Statistics Act, which mandated the collection of information about hate crimes (see the next panel for some examples); the Church Arsons Prevention Act, which makes it easier to prosecute church arsons as federal offenses; and the Hate Crime Sentencing Enhancement Act, providing for longer sentences in certain federal cases.

The Hate Crimes Prevention Act was introduced by Congressman Conyers in 1998, 1999, and 2000, and by Congressman Sheila Jackson-Lee in 2001, but it did not come to a vote in the House. It sought to add sexual orientation and disability to the list of characteristics protected by federal law. Arguing for passage on behalf of the American Civil Liberties Union, Christopher E. Anders, Legislative Counsel, pointed out that federal legislation is needed because state and local governments are often unwilling or unable to prosecute hate crimes. Anders contends that law enforcement agencies are often hostile to gay men and lesbians. The Act was revised (to add gender) and renamed the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act. If passed, it would provide support for criminal investigations and prosecutions by state and local law enforcement officials.

Critics of hate-crime laws say they violate the equal-protection provisions of the 14th Amendment. They ask: Are crimes against African Americans or homosexuals more serious, worthy of a more severe punishment, than crimes against, say, white males? Some contend that hate crimes are best dealt with at the community level. But former Michigan Supreme Court judge and former Detroit mayor Dennis Archer explained the importance of having recourse to justice under local or state and federal laws when prosecuting hate crimes by pointing out what happened to the attackers of Vincent Chin (see timeline). The state district court granted them probation, but a subsequent trial in federal court led to conviction of one of the attackers. In the Rodney King beating case, state prosecutors failed to get assault convictions but a federal jury convicted two of the four police officers charged with violating King's civil rights. And the U.S. Department of Justice points out that hate crimes victimize more than the immediate target and have a ripple effect. "A bias-motivated offense can cause a broad ripple of discomfiture among members of a targeted group, and a violent hate crime can act like a virus, quickly spreading feelings of terror and loathing across an entire community. Apart from their psychological impacts, violent hate crimes can create tides of retaliation and counterretaliation. Therefore, criminal acts motivated by bias may carry far more weight than other types of criminal acts."

While the debate rages, intolerance is still with us. In the year 2000 the Southern Poverty Law Center of Montgomery, Alabama, a non-profit organization that tracks hate crimes, reported that in the one-year period following college student Benjamin Smith's rampage through Illinois (timeline), the World Church of the Creator, of which he was a member, expanded from 41 to 76 chapters in 25 states and 5 foreign countries. Its two special groups for women grew from 5 to 10 chapters. The church is "Dedicated to the Survival, Expansion, and Advancement of the White Race."

The next panel presents FBI statistics on hate crimes.

Sources: Randy Amdt, "Panel discusses hate crimes, solutions," Nation's Cities Weekly, March 15, 1999, v22 i11 p3 (1). Brian Levin, "From Slavery to Hate Crime Laws: The Emergence of Race and Status-Based Protection in American Criminal Law," Journal of Social Issues, Vol 58, No. 2, 2002, pp. 227-245. Testimony of Legislative Counsel Christopher Anders on S. 622, the "Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999" Before the Senate Judiciary Committee, May 11, 1999, http://www.aclu.org/. US Department of Justice — A Policymaker's Guide to Hate Crimes," March 1997, http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/race/hate/bjahate.htm. Information retrieved November 8, 2002.