House bill extends definition of hate crime

The bill is a step toward equal rights for the LGBTQ community.

By Katie Moritz

Published May 4, 2009

A bill passed in the U.S. House will expand the definition of hate crime to include violence toward a person based on his or her gender identity or sexual orientation.

The bill, which passed April 29 on a vote of 249-175, with most Republicans standing against the bill, has been referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Gamma Rho Lambda President Yantézia Patrick said the legislation is a step in the right direction for equal rights for the lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, queer and questioning community. GRL is a progressive sorority that aims to include anyone, regardless of their sexual orientation.

"People have been attacked at bus stops because they're gay men waiting for a bus," Patrick said. "Now, people are really starting to see we might have to start being individualistic and start protecting certain minority groups."

Patrick said crimes based on sexual orientation have been ignored in the past. She hopes that this bill will help the U.S. will see the end of disregarded hate crimes.

"In the overarching scheme of things, it makes people realize that when it comes to it, they're not going to be overlooked," Patrick said about the bill. "It's often swept under the rug because people don't want to deal with 'You got beat up because you're a gay man or a lesbian.'"

There is a sense of security in the legislation being passed, Patrick said.

"People are going to feel safer walking the streets," Patrick said. "Not because less people want to harm them, but that there will be justice."

U.S. Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., supports the bill and has been supportive of hate crime legislation in the past, said Maria Speiser, a spokeswoman for McCaskill.

U.S. Rep. Roy Blunt, R-Mo., voted against the legislation on the grounds that the bill violates 14th Amendment rights, said Nick Simpson, a spokesman for Blunt.

"There is a concern that it places an emphasis on what people are thinking," Simpson said. "It doesn't matter what was going through your head or what your thoughts about the victim were at that time. Regardless, it is illegal."

Blunt's concern with the bill lies in the way criminals will be prosecuted, Simpson said.

"The 14th Amendment gives everyone the right to equal protection, but this bill would create a federal system of prioritizing crimes based on what the accused were thinking and not their actions," Simpson said.

Greg Magarian, a law professor at Washington University in St. Louis who specializes in First Amendment law, said there is no way the law could infringe on rights to free speech. As long as the speech against homosexuals is not intended to incite violence, religious leaders' speech will still be protected, he said.

"There is absolutely no rational basis for concern that this bill will curb or chill any activity that any religious group will engage in or has been engaged in in this country," Magarian said.

Those who think the bill will encroach on First Amendment rights probably have not read the bill or do not understand law, or have ulterior motives, Magarian said.

"There are some people that are happy to see gays, lesbians, blacks and women suffer intimidation and crime and are using this as a fig leaf to hide their own prejudice and indifference or build up their crazed right-wing constituencies to be afraid of those who don't look or act like them," Magarian said.

Although the controversial nature of the bill will cause it to be continually discussed, it means a long-awaited change of heart toward those in the LGBQT community, which, now more than ever, are reaching out for recognition and acceptance, Patrick said.

"There's comfort in having people recognize your identity," Patrick said. "If law can't protect you, what really is going to?"