I agree with all the points Ramesh makes. It is also important that readers and administration critics understand that federal law already has a hate crimes sentencing provision (Section 3A1.1 of the Sentencing Guidelines) which substantially increases a defendant’s sentence for any existing federal crime if the victim was singled out “because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation.”

The proposed legislation is not designed to bring federal law as it exists into line with modern sensibilities. That has already been done — over a decade ago. Instead, the bill would federalize crimes that the feds currently have no jurisdiction over because they do not touch upon any federal interest (e.g., regulation of interstate commerce and the protection of federal officials). Such crimes have always been handled at the state level, and many (if not most) of the states have their own hate-crimes laws.

The bill is not so much a hate-crimes bill as it is a federal power grab (although I sense that the proponents have a greater interest in appearing to be on the side of the angels than in increasing federal jurisdiction and influence at the expense of the states). And those who are already concerned about lack of enforcement in areas like immigration should take note: When the feds add to their jurisdiction, they typically do not add to their personnel — any new category of crimes competes with other categories for attention and necessarily diminishes the resources that can be targeted at more traditional federal enforcement areas, such as immigration, international narcotics trafficking, interstate frauds, and terrorism.