| About this site |
| About us |
| Our beliefs |
| Your first visit? |
| Contact us |
| External links |
| Good books |
| Visitor essays |
| Our forum |
| New essays |
| Other site features |
| Buy a CD |
| Vital notes |
| Spiritual/ethics |
| Spirituality |
| Morality/ethics |
| Absolute truth |
| Peace/conflict |
| Attaining peace |
| Religious tolerance |
| Religious hatred |
| Religious conflict |
| Religious violence |
| Laws and news |
| Religious laws |
| Religious news |
U.S. hate crime laws
Legislative activities: Federal & state
Click Here to Visit our Sponsors.
Proposed hate crimes legislation in the federal Senate:
1999-MAR-16: Bill S. 622 was introduced to the Senate under the sponsorship of Senator Ted Kennedy (D, MA), 39 other Democrats and 5 Republicans. 4,16
The principal changes to the existing 1969 law would be:
 |
Gender, disability and sexual orientation would become additional protected classifications. |
|
The six federally protected activities would be deleted. A victim would be protected by the law at all times, not just when they were doing specific activities, like being at work, voting, or attending a public school. |
The scope of the law would include:
|
Both men and women would be protected if the assault or threat of assault was gender-based |
|
Quadriplegics, paraplegics, and persons who are blind, deaf etc. would be protected from attacks from individuals because of their disability. |
|
Heterosexuals, gays, lesbians, and bisexuals would all be protected from crimes motivated by hatred of sexual orientation. |
The bill was read twice and referred to Committee on Judiciary. On 1999-MAR-24, it was referred to Subcommittee on Constitution, Federalism, Property. No further no action was taken.
1999-JUL-21: Bill S. 1406 was introduced by Orrin Hatch (R, UT). It would provide for:
|
Improved collection of hate crime data, |
|
The detection of hate crime trends, |
|
The preparation of a model statute for implementation by the states, and |
|
Making interstate travel to commit hate crime a crime. |
The bill was referred to the Committee on Judiciary on 1999-JUL-21. No further action was taken.
2000-MAY-12: Bill S. 2549 was introduced. It is a major piece of legislation to fund the Department of Defense during 2001. On JUN-19, Senator Levin introduced a hate crime amendment SA 3473 on behalf of Senator Kennedy. It had 19 cosponsors. One day later, the amendment was passed, without debate, by a vote of 57 to 42.
The appropriations bill itself was also approved. The bill went before a joint House/Senate conference conference committee. The House of Representatives has passed their corresponding Defense Department appropriations bill, but it did not include a hate crimes amendment. 5 The senate amendment did not survive.
2004-JUN-15: S.Amdt 3183: The Senate again passed an amendment to the current Defense bill, S. 2400 which will provide funding to the Armed Forces during fiscal year 2005. The bill is called the Local Law Enforcement Enhancement Act (LLEEA). As noted above, the existing federal hate-crime legislation allows prosecution of crimes committed on the basis of race, color, religion and national origin. The Senate bill would add three new classes: gender, sexual orientation and disability. Eighteen Republicans joined with all 47 the Democrats to vote in favor of the bill. All of the negative votes came from Republicans. The final vote was 65 to 33, almost a two to one ratio. Senator John Kerry (D-MA) did not vote as he was campaigning for the presidency. One independent senator who was also absent. 29
The bill's main sponsors were Senator Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) and Senator Gordon Smith (R-OR) This is the third time that the Senate has passed the bill. On both previous occasions, the House either defeated a similar measure or stripped the amendment during the conference committee. 30,31
Social and religious conservatives generally
oppose the bill. Many ignore the protections that the bill would give to
women, men, the disabled, and heterosexuals. They appear to be concerned
almost exclusively with protections given to persons of one sexual
orientation: homosexuals. They are concerned that a person who verbally
attacks gays or lesbians could be charged under the act if any violent or
criminal act resulted from the speech. This appears to be a
misinterpretation of the bill, because it could only be applied to a person
who has actually committed a crime. Speeches attacking gays and lesbians are not a
criminal behavior; they protected speech under the First Amendment.
Some comments on the Senate bill:
| Senator Gordon Smith, a co-supporter of the bill, said that the debate was far more civil and respectful than it has been for in previous years. He said: "The atmosphere of the debate was dramatically improved this year. In other debates, the arguments would be laced with homophobic commentary and misrepresentations of what the bill would do." |
| Olga Vives, vice-president in charge of action for the National Organization for Women congratulated the Senate, but criticized the bill because it does not also include protection for transgendered persons. She said: "We know that transgendered persons are more often the target of bias-motivated violent crime than other groups, yet the senators refused to add clear protections for this vulnerable population." 30 |
| David Duke, leader of the European-American Unity and Rights Organization whose web site is www.WhiteCivilRights.com, wrote: |
"S625 will create a federal 'anti-hate' bureaucracy, empowering the government to establish its definition of a 'hate crime' - one which gives favored status to homosexuals and minority groups. S625 also enhances penalties for 'hate crimes,' providing up to ten years prison for those who physically harm a member of a protected groups. This bill imposes federal hate laws on the states, meddles with states' enforcement of them, and punishes states that lag behind the federal hate crime agenda." 31
| 33 |
| Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council said that the bill: "...could very easily be used against pastors who preach against same-sex 'marriage'. It is now up to House conferees to ensure that... churches are allowed to follow their beliefs and not be silenced." He does not explain how churches following their beliefs are committing criminal acts and thus open to prosecution under this bill if it should become law. 35 |
| In a similar vein, the Massachusetts Family Institute writes: "If this 'hate crime' legislation were to become law, it would be used against individuals and churches that speak out on issues such as defending marriage and religious liberty." 36 |
The bill passed the Senate. On 2004-SEP-28, the House of Representatives passed a "motion to instruct" by a vote of 213 to 186. The motion recommends that the hate-crime text be retained when a joint House - Senate conference committee resolves differences between the House version of the Defense bill (which does not include hate-crime wording) and Senate version (which does include such wording). Majorities in both the Senate and House have thus indicated their support for the inclusion of the hate-crime provision. But the members of the committee are chosen by their party leaders and are not necessarily selected to reflect the opinions of the House and Senate. The hate-crime provision was deleted by the conference committee as in previous years.
According to Reuters:
"It's reprehensible that the GOP House leadership demanded the removal" of the hate crimes language, Sen. Edward Kennedy, a Massachusetts Democrat, said in a statement. ...Backers of the hate crimes legislation, a top priority for gay rights and disabled advocacy groups, have been trying to enact it since at least 1998, when the gaps in existing law were highlighted by two heinous crimes -- the dragging death of a black man named James Byrd in Texas and the fatal beating of a young gay man named Matthew Shepard in Wyoming. In addition to including protections for gays and the disabled, the legislation would also modernize and streamline earlier hate crime legislation enacted after the 1968 murder of Martin Luther King Jr. The goal is to make it easier to prosecute such crimes. Kennedy said the extra protections also were needed because of 'the shameful increase' in the number of hate crimes against Arabs and Muslims since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Opponents of the legislation contend hate crimes were better dealt with on a local instead of a federal level, and that the measure would improperly create a special category of victims." 37
Hate crime bills in the federal House:
| 1999 Activity: On MAR-11, House bill HR 1082, the Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999, was introduced. Its text was very similar to Senate bill S. 622. It was referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary on MAR-11, and to the Subcommittee on Crime on APR-1. No further action was taken. |
| 2000 Activity: On 2000-SEP-13, the House easily passed a non-binding resolution. It asked the conference committee for the Department of Defense Authorization Bill to incorporate the hate crimes legislation in that bill that had been passed as an amendment by the Senate earlier that year by a vote of 57 to 42. That amendment would add disability, gender, and sexual orientation as protected classes to an existing civil rights law which already protects people on the basis of their color, national origin, race, and religion. The vote was 232 to 192. 41 Republicans joined 190 Democrats support of the resolution; 174 Republicans and 17 Democrats were in opposition. The two independents were evenly split. 5 Republicans and 4 Democrats did not vote. In order to become law, the conference committee, which is appointed to reconcile differences between the House and Senate versions of the authorization bill, had to agree to include the hate crimes language which was already in the Senate version. Then both the House and the Senate would have had to approve the final version of the authorization bill. |
On 2000-SEP-14, Rev. Dr. C. Welton Gaddy, executive director of The Interfaith Alliance, a liberal religious group, issued a statement:
"I applaud the U.S. House of Representatives for passing hate crimes legislation. Neither hate nor violence is a traditional American value, both are abominations to democracy and spirituality."
"Despite the ludicrous efforts of the religious right to defeat HCPA through the manipulation of religion and scripture, their exclusionary agenda did not prevail. The sacred scriptures of many different religious traditions speak with dramatic unanimity on this matter of hate. When true to the prophetic core of our various religions, we cannot condemn hate and then refuse to act to stop hate and the violence that hate foments upon us. Religion and government can work together to create a society in which diverse people are safe as well as free."
"...We in the inter-religious community will continue to promote the primal moral values that nurture respect for the dignity and worth of every person and thus expose and seek to eradicate hatred as a malignancy of the mind and spirit. While it is true that legislation cannot remove hate from the hearts and minds of individuals, we learned a long time ago that legislation, like hate crimes legislation, can help to create a society in which people are influenced by their government's unbending intolerance of prejudice-based, hate-motivated violence..."Winnie Stachelberg, is a spokesperson with the Human Rights Campaign --- a group promoting equal rights for gays and lesbians. She regards the bill as a simple but vital piece of legislation: "It would just level the playing field. It would close a very big loophole that sexual orientation, gender and disability are not part of current law." 21
Pete Winn is an editor at Focus on the Family -- a Fundamentalist Christian organization. On 2000-SEP-15, he posted an essay on the House resolution . 20 Although the resolution, if implemented, would offer protection to bisexuals, disabled persons, gays, heterosexuals, lesbians, men, and women, he focused totally on the the gay/lesbian issue to the total exclusion of the other groups. He quoted two conservatives:
|
Although the bill won the "support of a broad, bi-partisan majority in both chambers of Congress, the President, and 175 law enforcement, religious, civic, and civil rights groups," it was stripped from the Department of Defense Authorization Bill on 2000-OCT-5 by a vote of 11 to 9. Sen. John Warner, (R-VA) chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he was concerned the controversial measure would doom the defense bill to a filibuster in the dying days of the session. President Clinton said:
"...the Republican leadership made a serious mistake by stripping the hate crimes legislation from the Department of Defense Authorization bill, despite strong bipartisan support in both the House and Senate. The Republican leaders have turned their backs on legislation designed to send the message that all persons should be treated the same under the law -- no matter what their race, color, religion, sex, national origin, sexual orientation, or disability."
Senate Democrats considered making a motion to consider a separate hate crimes bill. They considered trying every procedural move possible, doing "whatever we can" to get votes to allow them to "put pressure on our Republican colleagues to do the right thing." While advocates say they will keep working to get a stand-alone bill through Congress or get the provision added to another bill, they admit that the defense bill was their best chance. 22
| 2001 Activity: History repeated; the Senate attached a hate-crimes bill as an amendment to a local law-enforcement act -- a bill that had wide popular support. Chuck MiVille, a correspondent for Focus on the Family wrote: |
"It’s a bill that politicians hate to fight because it makes them look bigoted. Bind it to an anti-crime bill and it gets even tougher. But that is the situation that senators face, now that a hate-crimes bill has been introduced into the Senate, and Democratic Majority Leader Tom Daschle has indicated he will make passage a priority."
"Proponents of hate-crimes legislation admit that, if passed, such a bill would treat people differently under the same law. David Smith, of the Human Rights Campaign, the nation’s largest gay advocacy group, can justify that disparity because he believes hate violence is rampant."
"Yes, everybody should be treated the same, but when hate and violence occurs and targets entire communities of people, local law enforcement is provided with extra challenges as this simply will provide for them extra resources," Smith said.MiVille states that hate crimes are relatively rare, and that hate crimes legislation will "only politicize an already volatile issue." However, one study indicates that 41% of adult gays have already been the victim of gay bashing. MiVille quotes Michael Johnston of Jerusso Ministries who said that if you poll the public whether gays and lesbians should received additional special protection under a hate-crimes law, "the vast majority...will say absolutely not; that's unequal justice under law." This seems to be a confused response, because homosexuals would gain exactly the same protection against assaults as would heterosexuals and bisexuals. Persons of all sexual orientations would be protected by the bill.
The bill never made it into law.
| 2005 activity: An amendment to add a hate-crime
provision to HR-3132, "The Children's Safety Act" passed the House by
a vote of 223 to 199. The bill would improve methods of tracking sex
offenders. It would also give increased protection to representatives of a
number of minorities who have been determined to be victims of hate crimes.
However, much of the media attention was focused on its inclusion of sexual
orientation as a protected class. Also, although this protects homosexuals,
bisexuals and homosexuals equally, much interest was concentrated on the
benefit to persons with a homosexual orientation. Tony Perkins, head of the Family Research Council (FRC) stated: |
"Criminalizing thoughts as well as actions, and creating special categories of victims, are contrary to our entire system of laws. Furthermore, granting special protections based on one's 'sexual orientation' has repeatedly been rejected by Congress. It is shocking that a bill designed to protect children from sexual predators is now being used to protect the sexual preference of homosexuals. The Senate should reject the House's attempt to advance the political agenda of homosexuals at the expense of children."
The FRC claims that the measure was passed by "stealth," because much Congressional attention at the time was focusing on the confirmation of Judge John Roberts as Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court. 38 The bill was never made into law. The bill was later introduced in late 2005 without the "Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention" amendment.
| 2007 activity: Representatives John Conyers (D-MI) and Mark Kirk (R-IL) introduced H.R. 1592, the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2007 (LLEHCPA). 39 It would update the federal hate crimes act of 1968 which applied to only those hate crimes motivated by racism, or hatred of a victim's ethnicity, national origin or religion. LLEHCRA would expand coverage to include crimes in which the perpetrator was motivated by hatred of the victim's sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or disability. More details. |
State government activities:
On 2001-MAR-20, Focus on the Family, a Fundamentalist Christian organization, issued a series of alerts to parents about U.S. programs and legislation at the state level that are geared to increase the acceptance of homosexuality. 23 Two of the alerts deal with hate crimes legislation -- which Focus refers to as "ethnic intimidation laws." They advocate that everyone oppose these bills:
| Colorado: 2001: A hate-crimes bill, SB 75, would add four new protected categories. People would be protected from hate-crimes on the basis of their age, gender identity, mental disability and sexual orientation. It was passed by the Senate but rejected by the House State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee. |
| West Virginia: 2001: A bill, SB 23, would add sexual orientation to the state's hate-crimes law. Like all other proposed laws, it would protect all persons: heterosexual, homosexual, and bisexual from being victimized on the basis of their sexual orientation. It wold also protect people victimized because of physical disability. The bill passed the Senate but died in the House Judiciary Committee. Similar bills had been proposed each year for at least the prior eight years; none have passed. |
| California: 2001-2004: SB 1234 added consistency to existing hate-crime legislation. It was passed by the Assembly and Senate and signed into law by Governor Schwarzennegger (R) on 2004-SEP-22. It became effective on 2005-JAN-01. More information. 34 |
References used:
The following information sources were used to prepare and update the above essay. The hyperlinks are not necessarily still active today.
- "Gay martyr used to promote hate crime legislation: Emotions running high in skillfully manipulated media event," The WINDS, 1998-OCT-13, at: http://www.thewinds.org/
- "Local and national groups call for hate crime legislation following brutal Wyoming murder," 1998-OCT-12, at: http://www.glaad.org/
- "GBCS decries attack on gay Wyoming student and calls for passage of hate crime legislation," General Board of Church and Society, United Methodist Church, at: http://www.umc-gbcs.org/
- "Senate to consider hate-crimes measure," Baptist Press, at: http://www.mcjonline.com/
- "U.S. Senate OKs hate-crimes bill," Baptist Press, at: http://www.mcjonline.com/
- "Hate motivated crime and violence: Information for schools, communities, & families," National Education Association at: http://www.nea.org/
- Gregory Herek,et. al., "Hate crime victimization among lesbian, gay and bisexual adults," Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 12(2): Pages 195-215.
- "Statistics: hate crime," National Center for Victims of Crime (NCVC), at: http://www.ncvc.org/
- Dan Luzadder, "[Colorado] House rejects hate-crime bill," 1999-APR-16 at: http://insidedenver.com/
- Cited in: "Hate Crimes Laws: Making thoughts a crime," Concerned Women for America," at: http://cwfa.org/
- "1999 Hate crimes laws: Map of state statutes," Anti-Defamation League, at: http://www.adl.org/
- "1999 Hate crimes laws: State hate crimes statutory provisions," Anti-Defamation League, at: http://www.adl.org/
- Quoted in: Sam Fulwood III, "Just what is a hate crime?," Los Angeles Times, at: http://www.seattletimes.com/
- "General talking points on anti-gay hate crime," PFLAG Action Alert, at: http://www.gcym.org/
- "Key House votes taken," CitizenLink news briefs, Focus on the Family, 2000-SEP-12.
- The text of S. 622 is available online at: http://www.traditionalvalues.org/
- C.E. Anders, "American Civil Liberties Union statement on S. 622: Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 1999," at: http://www.aclu.org/
- Chuck Robb, "Robb hails Senate vote on hate crime legislation," 2000-JUN-21, at: http://www.senate.gov/
- "ACLU calls on House to protect free speech while considering hate crimes legislation," 1999-AUG-4, at: http://www.aclu.org/
- Pete Winn, "Punishing hate...or family values?," Focus on the Family, at: http://www.family.org/
- Martha Kleder, "Constitutional implications of hate crimes," Focus on the Family at: http://www.family.org/
- Various quotations taken from the United Against Hate web site at: http://www.unitedagainsthate.org/
- "Stand up for your children," Focus on the Family, at: http://www.family.org/
- "Hawaii passes 'Hate Crimes' bill," CitizenLink/Focus on the Family newsletter, 2001-MAY-4
- Chuck MiVille, "Hate crimes legislation returns to Senate," Focus on the Family, 2001-JUL-1, at: http://www.family.org/
- "Uniform Crime Reports, FBI, at: http://www.fbi.gov/
- "Hate Crime definition," FBI, at: http://www.fbi.gov/
- "Crime in the United States, 2000," FBI press release, 2001-OCT-22, at: http://www.fbi.gov/
- "Thought crimes legislation passes Senate," Family Research Council, Washington Update, 2004-JUN-16.
- Jan Erickson & Casey Shevin, "Senate Approves Federal Hate Crime Legislation; Fails to Include All Affected Groups," National Organization for Women, 2004-JUN-18, at: http://www.now.org/
- Joe Crea, "Senate again approves hate crime bill...." Washington Blade, 2004-JUN-18, at: http://www.washblade.com/
- David Duke, "http://www.davidduke.com/
- Kristine Gloria, "Hate crime law goes to House with Senate's OK. Amendment would allow federal aid for law enforcment [sic]," The Daily Texan, 2004-JUN-17.
- Allie Martin, "California Christians Urge Hate Crimes Bill Veto," Agape Press, 2004-AUG-26, at: http://www.crosswalk.com/
- Tony Perkins, "News from the Hill," Washington Update, Family Research Council, 2004-SEP-13.
- "Action alert: Protect free speech!," E-Alert, Massachusetts Family Institute, 2004-OCT-1.
- "Hate Crimes Legislation Likely Dead for Year," Reuters, 2004-OCT-7, at: http://www.reuters.com/
- "FRC Denounces Stealth Passage of 'Hate Crimes' Legislation," Family Research Council, 2005-SEP-14, at: http://www.frc.org/
- "H.R. 1592," text, at: http://thomas.loc.gov/
Copyright © 1999 to 2007 by Ontario Consultants on Religious
Tolerance
Latest update: 2007-APR-12
Author: B.A. Robinson
|
|
