Congressional Democrats invoked the horror of lynching, which is already against federal law and illegal in every state, to pass a worrying extension of hate-crime laws.
Congressional Democrats invoked the horror of lynching, which is already against federal law and illegal in every state, to pass a worrying extension of hate-crime laws.
I n every state in the Union, it is a crime with severe punishment to engage in lynching. It should be. Lynching is a horrific crime and should be punished to the fullest extent of the law.
Notably, it is difficult to get data for lynchings past 1968 because they have not, thankfully, been a significant crime over the last half century. Texas witnessed one of the worst in recent memory – the brutal 1998 dragging death of James Byrd in Jasper, Texas, for which two of his murderers were rightly put to death, and another sentenced to life in prison.
I voted against a bill titled “The Emmett Till Anti-Lynching Act” because the bill does not actually criminalize any conduct; the conduct addressed in the bill is already unlawful federally and in every state in the union, and I have strong resistance to empowering federal government to police thought. What the bill actually does is add the word “lynching” to existing hate-crime statutes while establishing a 30-year sentence for conspiracy to commit a “hate crime.” These hate crimes range the gamut, from race to religion and sexual orientation to gender identity.
This bill is yet another example of legislative deception by the Washington establishment on both sides of the aisle. Here, we have legislation that effectively does one thing while pushing a message only deliverable through the title of the bill that resonates with our hearts and coerces members of Congress to support it despite the actual effect. Who can oppose a bill titled the “anti-lynching” act? Do you know how many members of Congress said to me, “Gosh, I agree with you, but that’s just too brutal of a vote?” Why? Because it’s literally called the anti-lynching act.
The actual effect of this legislation is to make people feel good about saying they are prohibiting lynching while doing nothing more than increasing maximum sentences for conspiracy to commit “hate” crimes, which are already on the federal books under existing law. Many of my colleagues complain about over-criminalization — yet vote to increase penalties and empower prosecutors. Some of my colleagues complain about criminalizing thoughtcrimes — yet vote to expand criminal penalties for those very thoughtcrimes. But to be clear, the offenses committed under this bill are already federal crimes and are already classified as hate crimes.
Despite the fact that the U.S. Constitution empowers states — not the federal government — to police the crimes under the bill, creating separate sentencing carveouts in either jurisdiction for “hate crimes” is a slippery slope. It’s easy to think of the worst-case examples when discussing legislation involving hate crimes, but the letter of the law also matters for the simplest of cases. While lauded by its supporters, loyal stenographers in the corporate media, and the social-media mob, this legislation could set the stage to harm the most vulnerable populations — of all races – by encouraging prosecutors to look for any reason to enhance sentences by targeting someone’s thoughts, and not their actions.
As a former federal prosecutor, I certainly recognize the elements of a conspiracy still must be met, and for that reason and my belief that anyone actually conspiring to lynch deserves to rot in jail, I voted yes in the previous Congress on a similar measure, which did not become law. But as I have watched our government target Americans for all manner of sins, and watched increased action by Western governments such as Canada targeting citizens, it is clear to me that I cannot in good conscience add more avenues for enterprising Department of Justice prosecutors to target Americans for their belief systems.
Remember that in Finland right now, a member of Parliament and a bishop are on trial for quoting scripture and expressing their biblical worldview about sexual-orientation issues. Think about that. It’s not a big leap from here to there, because the road to hell is often paved with good intentions.
And this, this underlies the entire notion of hate crimes. Murder itself — or attempting to kill or violently harm another human being — is the crime of hate, no matter the reason, no matter the person. Prosecute those actors. Prosecute any conspiracy. Increase the punishments for the murder or the conspiracy to commit the murder. But stop policing thought and stop blindly empowering the federal Department of Justice.