George Orwell, 1984, Book 1, Chapter 1
The subject of hate crimes legislation is one that is being increasingly brought to the forefront of our consciousness. I guess a simple definition of a hate crime would be, any crime motivated by prejudice and hate against a social group. Upon first glance it would seem quite right to recognize the horrendous nature of prejudice by punishing, more harshly, crimes committed for that reason. That is the problem with much of our citizenry today, usually a first glance is all that is ever given to most subjects.
By seeking to punish more severely, those who are found guilty of committing a crime for reasons of prejudice or hate, a deadly blow is dealt to our very important concept of Equal Under the Law. For hate crime laws to be enforced, two things must occur, both of which are very problematic if a just legal system is the goal. Firstly, it must be assumed that crimes committed for certain reasons, or against certain people, are more serious than the same crime committed for a supposed non-prejudiced reason. Secondly, these laws require the courts to determine what a criminal was thinking and feeling when committing the crime.
If bias-motivated acts of violence are worse than other acts of violence, than a victim is deemed less of one if no evidence of prejudice on the part of the perpetrator is found. Common sense, however, shows instantly that this concept is faulty reasoning at best. Is a person any less raped or dead if the victimizer is a sociopath, choosing his victim at random? Hate crime laws are unjust for this reason alone.
The second major problem with hate crimes legislation is that it takes our laws uncomfortably close to the notion of thought crimes. To prosecute a defendant who is accused of a hate crime, the justice system is forced to prove what the defendant was feeling and what he believes. This concept would have been, and was, utterly rejected by the Founders of this country. Thomas Jefferson could not have been any clearer than when he said in his Bill for Religious Freedom in 1779, "the rightful purposes of civil government" are to punish "overt acts against peace and good order." Jefferson went on to say that no judge “can intrude his powers into the field of opinions". Hate crime laws do exactly that. Murder is an overt act, but hate stems from thought, an internalized process. Hate crime then, is the ability of the state to determine and then prosecute man based on his thoughts.
Hate crime laws are not only unjust they are completely unnecessary. Violent acts that are prohibited under hate crime laws are already crimes under previously existing laws. Not only are they unnecessary, they are contrary to the important ideal we call Blind Justice. Lady Justice is often depicted wearing a blindfold. This is to symbolize that justice is to be meted out objectively, without fear or favor, regardless of the identity, power, or weakness of the individuals brought before the courts. The very principle of Blind Justice is at the heart of a free society. Hate crime laws take off Lady Justice’s blindfold.