Law, by its nature, can only regulate actions, not thoughts. This country once had the principle of Free Speech. They ignored all that and created laws that penalize a real or supposed thought, opinion, or attitude.
Those laws are invalid by their nature.
Unfortunately, they are in effect and being enforced. So, if you’re White, keep your mouth shut, because anything that comes out of it can be called “hate speech” and you’re guilty without recourse.
The obvious problem is that hate legislation is enforced unequally.
Don't many laws - e.g., laws against homicide - also take into consideration the motives, intent, and state of mind of the perpetrator? Wouldn't, e.g., the concept of "premeditation" fall completely if the mental processes of the perpetrator were not taken into account? Of course, there must be some objective evidence of the perpetrator's internal thought processes, but the history of law indicates that they (the mental processes) can be inferred from exterior evidence.
Regards,