Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
Posted on 05/11/2009 10:47:32 AM PDT by Conservative Coulter Fan
Why is the press remaining mostly silent about the so-called "hate crimes law" that passed in the House on April 29? The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act passed in a 249-175 vote (17 Republicans joined with 231 Democrats). These Democrats should have been tested on their knowledge of the First Amendment, equal protection of the laws (14th Amendment), and the prohibition of double jeopardy (no American can be prosecuted twice for the same crime or offense). If they had been, they would have known that this proposal, now headed for a Senate vote, violates all these constitutional provisions.
This bill would make it a federal crime to willfully cause bodily injury (or try to) because of the victim's actual or perceived "race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability" - as explained on the White House Web site, signaling the president's approval. A defendant convicted on these grounds would be charged with a "hate crime" in addition to the original crime, and would get extra prison time.
[T]he House "hate crime" bill allows defendants found innocent of that offense in a state court to be tried again in federal court because of insufficiently diligent prosecutors.
The extra punishment applies only to these "protected classes." As Denver criminal defense lawyer Robert J Corry Jr. asked (Denver Post April 28): "Isn't every criminal act that harms another person a 'hate crime'?" Then, regarding a Colorado "hate crime" law, one of 45 such state laws, Corry wrote: "When a Colorado gang engaged in an initiation ritual of specifically seeking out a "white woman" to rape, the Boulder prosecutor declined to pursue 'hate crime' charges." She was not enough of one of its protected classes.
Corey adds that the state "hate crime" law - like the newly expanded House of Representatives federal bill - "does not apply equally" (as the 14th Amendment requires), essentially instead "criminalizing only politically incorrect thoughts directed against politically incorrect victim categories."
Whether you're a Republican or Democrat, think hard about what Corry adds: "A government powerful enough to pick and choose which thoughts to prosecute is a government too powerful."
But James Madison, who initially introduced the First Amendment to the Constitution, had previously written to Thomas Jefferson on the passage of the Virginia Statute on Religious Freedom: "We have in this country extinguished forever ... making laws for the human mind." No American, he emphasized later, would be punished for his "thoughts."
However, doesn't the House "Hate Crimes Bill" state that nothing in the legislation shall "prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition" - or speech "protected by the free speech or free exercise clauses in the First Amendment"?
Remember, however, as Kathleen Gilbert notes (LifeSiteNews.com) that "free speech advocates have pointed out that under current U.S. law, any action that 'abets, counsels, commands (or) induces a perceived 'hate crime' shares in the guilt of that crime and is therefore punishable."
But doesn't this new bill slip in an insistence that "evidence or expression or association of the defendant may not be introduced as evidence at trail unless the evidence specifically relates to that offense"?
In the definitive constitutional analysis of James B. Jacobs and researcher Kimberly Potter (Oxford University Press 1998, still in print), it is documented in "Hate Crimes: Criminal Law and Identity Politics" that "In Grimm v. Churchill the arresting officer was permitted to testify that the defendant had a history of making racial remarks. Similarly, in People v. Lampkin, the prosecution presented as evidence racist statements the defendant had uttered six years before the crime for which he was on trial," as specifically relating to the offense.
As for the 14th Amendment's essential requirement that no person be denied "the equal protection of the laws," there is carved above the entrance to the Supreme Court: "Equal Justice Under Law."
This legislation, certain to be passed by the Senate, will come to the Supreme Court. I hope the Justices will look up at the carving as they go into the building.
They should also remember that the Fifth Amendment makes clear: "nor shall any person be subject for the same offence to be twice put in jeopardy." But the House "hate crime" bill allows defendants found innocent of that offense in a state court to be tried again in federal court because of insufficiently diligent prosecutors; or, as Attorney General Eric Holder says, when state prosecutors claim lack of evidence. It must be tried again in federal court!
Imagine Holder as the state prosecutor in the long early stages of the Duke University Lacrosse rape case!
1984.
It’s a novel. Not a training manual.
So long as the person is White, M/F Christian it doesn’t apply to them . It’s all about the other Them ....
In Maryland they classify some actions as hate incidents because they are protected by the first amendment. A racial slur during a domestic disturbance and a slur written is chalk. This allows the police to investigate and use their powers to embarrass publicly the person who did it. Hate crimes are always suspected until a suspect is found, because they have to know the race, sex, religion, etc of the suspect.
Accused: “But, but Your Honor, I merely thought that——”
Judge: “You had the gall to have a thought? GUILTY!!”
Accused: “But I thought that the Constitution protected—”
JUDGE: “You have the nerve to repeat your crime in a Court of Law. Ten years will cure you”
He could have been sent to prison for life on top of his misdemeanor convictions (if this thing had been pushed).
Rather, I think the real fight over this law will be the fight to limit its scope as applied. Things like whether it could be applied to priests/ministers/rabbis/etc if a member of their congregation attacks someone are the battles we need to win - it's not a stretch to think of some corrupt AUSA prosecuting a minister for inciting violence AND a hate crime in a situation like this, and it would be the end of the First Amendment if it were allowed to happen.
When do they start universal hatred testing, i.e. just hook people up to brainwave monitors and if any hatred is detected, haul the person off??
I’d bet six months’ pay that this bill, if passed, would NEVER be used to prosecute an attack against a straight white Christian male.
I’d bet five years’ pay if the attacker were a Muslim.
Simple, we already have such testing...Robert Bork detailed an incident at a university...a sensitivity training session...where a white female student with blond hair was singled out of the group and attacked until in tears without a single student coming to her aid.
I was reading a story online yesterday about a young Jewish man who was tortured in France by a gang of Muslims...he was burned and left for dead by the leader...a rabid anti-Semite...and Michelle Malkin covered a story about a Knoxville, Tennesse couple that were carjacked, raped mutilated, and burned by five black suspects...of course that “hate crime” wasn’t a national news story.
is Faglietta also gay?
Channon Christian and Christopher Newsom
Yes, those two unfortunate people.
When in the course of human events...
Sports were great past times, but they are at the point of idolatry...I remember a commercial for football...I don’t recall the specifics, but basically you had a pro player saying his church was football and plugging the sunday game. Don’t forget...millions upon millions are are just waiting breathlessly for the next...American Idol!
With tinfoil hat on my head I say this is the reason you don’t ask 9th graders for their version of how to attack the US.
Premptively ends the careers of troublesome leaders in the future who had thoughts not in line with the Obamacracy.
Still: the idea of thought control, speech control, under any circumstance aside from national security items, is done by tyrants. We have common sense speech control under a civil society but when the Govt. gets into deciding our thoughts, ideas and theories, (non-violent), then we have Soviet style , Fascist style, liberal style control. If only the Left had the same speech control they want for all others. The nation would be better off, LOL.
“Maybe Americans have become cowards?..A revolt would mess heavily with the beer drinking and football..Basketball, Baseball, Wrastling, and Car races..” and American Idol, and “The Bachelor” and...
“If only the Left had the same speech control they want for all others.”
But, because they’re the “ruling class,” it doesn’t apply to them. Must be good to be King.
Exactly.. heavy on the ETC..
There’s another factor involved as to why you’ll never see anti-leftist speech/thought codes.
Conservatives don’t do that.
However, throughout history, it is always the collectivists/statists that seek to criminalize political opposition. This usually, historically, leads to mass extermination of said opposition.
Idolotry.. I think you have something there..
From team worship to locality worship..
They never are, unless the victim is the right demographic.
Sad.
Murder person A, be punished.
Murder a protected class, be punished x10.
On that day we all [will] see whether our constitution means anything anymore, or not.
If not, the lack of a constitution surely will not protect those who subverted it any more than those who w/could not be protected by it.
The knife cuts both ways.
That, is a fact.
Yup - It really throws equal protection and double jeopardy completely out the window, don’t it?!??
They did the same thing to Fat Nick Minuci in New York. He was charged with a hate crime for defending himeself against black criminals. The criminals were never charged and Nick was sentenced to 7 years in prison for defending himself. He never got a white jury, the liberal media including the New York Nazi Times even twisted the facts and made him look like a racist.
Forgot to mention 1984 along with the Turner Diaries, Red Dawn, ETC. Those Should be considered for training purposes. We are entering a new dark age.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.