« Impeach the "Insane Criminal" | Main | Will "Zoo" End Zoo Taboo? »

January 21, 2007

Are Hate-Crimes Laws Inherently Biased?

The Catholic League is making a very interesting observation: that hate-crime laws demonstrate a certain inherent bias. After reading their rationale, I think they may have a point.

Yesterday, the New York Times ran a story about two 20-year-olds, and an 18-year-old, who were arrested for stealing statues of baby Jesus from nativity scenes over the past two years. They hit the New York-suburban communities of Suffern and Haverstraw several times in 2005 and 2006. The police said they will not charge them with committing hate crimes; each is being charged with 14 counts of petty larceny.

Yesterday, WNBC.com reported that a 20-year-old was arrested for kicking a menorah in the New York suburban community of St. James. He is being charged with a hate crime and could face seven years in prison. He is being charged with a felony.

Catholic League president Bill Donohue commented as follows:

“This is so interesting. The reason the menorah is allowed in New York City public schools is because the authorities have branded it a secular symbol, and the reason the crèche is barred is because the same authorities have branded it a religious symbol. Yet when a 20-year-old man vandalizes a menorah outside New York he is charged with a hate crime and may spend seven years behind bars for his felony, while three others of the same age who vandalize several crèches outside New York—over a two-year period—are given a slap on the wrist.

“We have long maintained that hate-crime laws evince a bias of their own. This proves it.”

What do you think? Is this merely an anecdotal case, and meaningless in the big picture, or is it typical and significant?

Posted by Becky at January 21, 2007 08:33 PM