DeMint Opposes Hate Crimes Amendment: Does Not Fulfill 'Equal Justice Under the Law'
07/16/2009 - 05:37:52 PM
Sen. DeMint spoke in opposition to the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act (S.909) on the Senate floor today. The bill was introduced to the National Defense Authorization bill as an amendment by Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.). Also cosponsored by Sen Ted Kennedy (D-Mass.), S.909 would broaden federal hate crimes law to include crimes influenced by the gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or disability of the victim.
Saying the measure would criminalize our thoughts and beliefs, DeMint referenced the portion of the bill that states "Nothing in this Act shall be construed to allow prosecution based solely upon an individual's expression of racial, religious, political, or other beliefs." DeMint said the use of the word "solely" makes it clear that the intent of the legislation is to enable the prosecution of speech if it is part of the broader prosecution of an action that could be perceived as a hate crime.
The House passed its version of the bill, H.R. 1913, in April. Liberal Democrats are attempting to tout the bill as enjoying bipartisan support, but 17 House Democrats joined 158 Republicans Representatives in opposing it. In the 110th Congress, Sen. Kennedy's hate crimes legislation was approved by a voice vote as an amendment to the Senate Defense Reauthorization bill but was later stripped in committee. President Obama has said he supports the 111th's current version.
Attorney General Eric Holder was questioned (video here) during a Senate hearing in June by Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) regarding the scope of protection provided by the bill. Holder admitted that the legislation would only protect traditional victims of hate crimes, saying "What we are looking for here in terms of expansion of the statute are instances where there is a historic basis. See, groups of people who are singled out for violence perpetrated against them because of who they are." (73:00) Holder asserted that the legislation would not protect a Christian minister attacked by a homosexual for preaching the Bible's teachings on sexuality (58:00-61:00), nor would it apply if a Muslim radical murdered a member of the U.S. military, as happened in Arkansas on June 1 (70:00).
If white heterosexual males are not considered by Holder to be "historical" targets of bias-motivated crimes, does that mean that the Matthew Shephard Hate Crimes Prevention Act ignores hate crimes directed at certain ethnicities or genders? Is applying such different standards in the name of recognizing politically correct, historically-minority demographics really "equal protection under the law," as our legal tradition portends to provide?
