Donate

Groundbreaking Analysis of Hate Crime Laws Finds Limitations and Opportunities in the Face of Rising Hate Violence

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
MEDIA CONTACTS:   

Rebecca Farmer, Movement Advancement Project
rebecca@lgbtmap.org | 303-578-4600 ext 122 

(July 28, 2021)With a rise in hate violence across the country, a new report from the Movement Advancement Project (MAP) and 16 leading civil rights organizations provides a groundbreaking analysis of state and federal hate crime laws. The report features a foreword by Judy Shepard, mother of Matthew Shepard and Board/Chair President of the Matthew Shephard Foundation.
  1. Read the report
  2. See the report infographics
The report provides an unprecedented look at both the opportunities and limitations of hate crime laws as a means of preventing and addressing hate violence. While responding to hate violence is imperative, the report finds that hate crime laws across the country are inconsistent and provide complex and often incomplete methods of addressing hate violence. This analysis comes amid a spike in hate crimes in recent years—and as the country is examining racial justice and racial bias in our criminal justice system.

“At a time of rising hate violence, we need tore-examine and expand our responses. Hate crime laws serve a necessary purpose, but they are inconsistent, sometimes flawed, and can even harm the very communities they are meant to serve. We need to improve our hate crime laws and engage in broader solutions to reducing hate in our country. Like any law, hate crime laws alone won’t fix a problem as large as rising hate violence,” said Ineke Mushovic, Executive Director of MAP.

The partners releasing the report are: Anti-Defamation League, Asian Americans Advancing Justice – AAJC (Advancing Justice – AAJC),Equality Federation Institute, James Byrd Jr. Center to Stop Hate at the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, Jews for Racial & Economic Justice, Lambda Legal, LatinoJustice PRLDEF, Matthew Shepard Foundation, National Black Justice Coalition, National Center for Lesbian Rights, National Center for Transgender Equality, National Council of Jewish Women, National Disability Rights Network, Sikh Coalition, Southern Poverty Law Center, and the Union of Reform Judaism. (Read statements from these organizations.) 
 
Hate Crime Laws Vary Widely Across the Country
The report finds that federal and state governments vary widely in their responses to hate violence. This complex patchwork means that someone who experiences a hate crime may have a completely different set of protections, options, or access to resources depending on where the crime occurs.  
 
Challenges of Addressing Hate Violence Through the Criminal Justice System
Addressing hate violence when it happens is imperative. State hate crime laws provide avenues for responding to hate crimes, but they also highlight the challenges inherent in the criminal justice system. These challenges illustrate paths forward for both improving hate crime laws and responding more comprehensively to hate violence:

  1. Failing to address root causes of violence, as current hate crime laws focus on punishing people charged with hate crimes without challenging underlying biases at the individual and broader societal levels. Additionally, harsher sentencing has not been shown to deter crime. 

  2. Widespread bias in the criminal justice system results in significant racial disparities in enforcement, as well as disparities for LGBTQ people, people with disabilities, and low-income people. These are often the very communities that are targeted for hate violence. Evidence shows that, for example, even though the majority of hate crimes are committed by white people, many states’ law-enforcement-recorded hate crimes disproportionately list Black people as offenders.  

  3. Flaws in hate crime data collection and reporting are widespread, and the current system of federal data collection, relies only on the voluntary participation of law enforcement. Additionally, victims of hate crimes may be wary of reporting the crime to the police if they do not trust the police. 

  4. Changing the intent of the law, for example, by attempting to add police officers – a profession – as a protected class in hate crime laws, despite the fact that all 50 states already have criminal statutes that specifically address and punish violence against a law enforcement officer.  
Expanding Solutions to Address Hate Violence
The report highlights opportunities for both improving hate crime laws and better supporting communities affected by hate violence:

  1. Investing in communities that are harmed by hate violence, such as people of color, LGBTQ people, people of minority faiths, and disabled people. Expanding nondiscrimination protections and investing in social safety nets will help reduce the instability caused by discrimination. In turn, this reduces vulnerable communities’ exposure to potential violence.  

  2. Preventing violence through work that not only aims to reduce hate crimes, but also works to reduce hate and violence overall.  

  3. Improving law enforcement accountability and training, including addressing how law enforcement can disproportionately harm vulnerable communities. 

  4. Improving data collection can help connect people impacted by hate crimes to resources and support. More robust data can also support more tailored responses to hate violence, track potential disparities or bias in the enforcement of hate crime laws, and evaluate the efficacy of non-carceral responses to hate crime.  

  5. Shifting focus toward support and healing, such as through expanded measures to support victims and survivors of hate crimes, community education and response strategies, and non-carceral approaches to justice.  
“As our country continues to grapple with racial injustice, bias in the criminal justice system, and rising hate violence against too many communities, it is critical that we reexamine our responses to hate crimes. It’s clear that additional solutions are needed to address hate violence, including a careful review of how hate crime laws in their current and potential forms fit into the work of building safe communities for everyone,” said Mushovic.

### 

MAP's mission is to provide independent and rigorous research, insight and communications that help speed equality and opportunity for all. MAP works to ensure that all people have a fair chance to pursue health and happiness, earn a living, take care of the ones they love, be safe in their communities, and participate in civic life. 


Stay Informed

Be the first to know about new reports and MAP news by signing up for our newsletter


Become a Member

MAP membership and certain MAP materials are restricted to the staff and board members of LGBTQ movement organizations and/or major funders of the movement for LGBTQ equality. Click below to become a member of MAP.

Join MAP

View our privacy policy.

Sexual Orientation Policy Tally

The term “sexual orientation” is loosely defined as a person’s pattern of romantic or sexual attraction to people of the opposite sex or gender, the same sex or gender, or more than one sex or gender. Laws that explicitly mention sexual orientation primarily protect or harm lesbian, gay, and bisexual people. That said, transgender people who are lesbian, gay or bisexual can be affected by laws that explicitly mention sexual orientation.

Gender Identity Policy Tally

“Gender identity” is a person’s deeply-felt inner sense of being male, female, or something else or in-between. “Gender expression” refers to a person’s characteristics and behaviors such as appearance, dress, mannerisms and speech patterns that can be described as masculine, feminine, or something else. Gender identity and expression are independent of sexual orientation, and transgender people may identify as heterosexual, lesbian, gay or bisexual. Laws that explicitly mention “gender identity” or “gender identity and expression” primarily protect or harm transgender people. These laws also can apply to people who are not transgender, but whose sense of gender or manner of dress does not adhere to gender stereotypes.

Choose an Issue