The Cincinnati Enquirer |
Editorial Page
|
Nov. 14, 1998 |
| "Punish the crime, not the hate", says the Enquirer’s headline to Professor Anthony Dillof’s op-ed piece opposing hate crime legislation (Nov. 6). He claims that racists of all kinds do not deserve punishment aimed at them "simply for being a bad person."
His argument ignores the reality of the Supreme Court’s unanimous decision in Wisconsin v. Mitchell. The court upheld a Wisconsin statute calling for an enhanced sentence where the defendant "intentionally selects the person against who the crime (is committed) because of the race, religion, color, disability, sexual orientation, national origin or ancestry of that person". The Supreme Court affirmed that the statute was directed not at a defendant’s bigoted ideas, but on the actions which grew out of those ideas. The court made clear that First Amendment protection of speech |
does not prohibit the use of speech as evidence "to establish the elements of a crime or to prove motive or intent."
After this Supreme Court decision, free speech arguments like Mr. Dillof’s cannot be used effectively to block penalty-enhancement laws. Even though the underlying conduct is already illegal, hate crime laws show public revulsion at the harmful consequences of bigotry. Good public policy demands accurately counting hate crimes and decisively punishing their perpetrators. Barbara Glueck, Area Director, American Jewish Committee
|
 |
 |
