…[w]hen Government seeks to use its full power, including the criminal law, to command where a person may get his or her information or what distrusted source he or she may not hear, it uses censorship to control thought. This is unlawful. The First Amendment confirms the freedom to think for ourselves.I had an "AHA!" moment as I read that because it reminded me of what we've done with the criminal law in the form of "hate crimes" regulation. "Hate crimes" are additional punishments added to existing crimes based on what we perceive someone was thinking at the time they committed the act. Criminal acts should always be punished, criminal thoughts should not. Since we cannot know for a fact what someone was thinking at any given moment, it would seem to me to be completely unconstitutional to add punishments for those perceived thoughts.
And of course, our "hate crime" statutes are applied only in specific cases. If a robber hates the fact that the store has money and he doesn't, it's not a hate crime to rob the store or even shoot the clerk. However, if a gay guy gets beaten up a "hate crime" is almost assumed, even though the motivation cannot be completely clear. We've made it unlawful to think certain things about certain groups and punish crimes harder involving those groups than we would punish the same act against someone else not a member of the protected class.
I'd love to see someone challenge the existing hate crime statutes based on Kennedy's opinion in Citizen's United. If thought control is unlawful in that case it should be unlawful in all cases.
Posts
2 comments:
What on Earth do you have against "hate crime" laws? And what makes you think they're unconstitutional? We have all sorts of aggravating and mitigating factors we consider in criminal law. "Hate" is just another aggravting factor. What? Are you looking for permission to shoot a gay person or something?
JMJ
Hey, way to completely miss the point, Jersey. Your mom must be very proud of you.
I realize it's a waste of time, but I'll try and explain it to you, and I'll be careful not to use big words.
If I shoot someone I should be punished for shooting someone. It shouldn't matter who that person is or whether they belong to some politically correct sub-group. People are not animals on the Endangered Species List - they're supposed to all be equal.
"Hate crime" enhancements are not based on actions, but thoughts, and in America we don't punish people for what they're thinking. We punish for actions. When we allow punishment for thoughts, it's not a long leap to get to the point where we're punishing people for their thoughts regardless of whether they translate into actions.
It's wrong and should be stopped.
Post a Comment