Criminology Hate Crime Legislation
by
Susann Wiedlitzka
  • LAST MODIFIED: 28 September 2016
  • DOI: 10.1093/obo/9780195396607-0206

Introduction

Hate crime is a problem in many countries around the world. Scholars define hate crimes as unlawful conduct directed at different target groups, not only including violent acts, but also property damage, harassment and trespassing (see Green, et al. 2001, cited under Origins and Definitions of the Term “Hate Crime”). Perpetrators commit hate crime motivated by prejudice not only against their victim’s race, religion, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender, or disability, but also against a variety of different target characteristics. One way to better understand hate crime is to explore how governments in different parts of the world address the issue of crimes motivated by hate or prejudice. Targeted laws and policies transformed hate violence from ordinary to extraordinary crime (see Bleich 2007, cited under General Overviews). Western countries moved away from a system of rehabilitation, welfare, and humanitarianism, and moved toward punitive, retributive, and law and order measures (see Mason 2009, cited under Hate Crime Legislation in the Asia-Pacific Region). Several social movements (e.g., the civil rights movement, women’s movement, and LGBT movement) laid the foundation for anti-violence movements and placed the hate crime discourse on the political and legislative agenda. Different countries implemented hate crime legislation in order to condemn crime committed due to prejudice or bias against an individual or group of people, introducing such legislation during different periods in time. The United States emerged as the leader of hate crime policy approaches, implementing legal responses to prejudice and bias in the early 20th century. The United States was also the first country to circulate the term “hate crime” during the 1980s (see Green, et al. 2001, cited under Origins and Definitions of the Term “Hate Crime”). Following such actions in the United States, Europe and the Asia-Pacific region followed suit in implementing their own responses to hate crime. The diversity of hate crime legislation in different countries makes it difficult to combine the legislative contexts under a common framework. Federal and state laws differ globally in their protection of certain categories of victims, as well as utilizing different jurisdictional legislative frameworks. A controversial debate exists around the need for a separate set of hate crime legislation. Scholars dispute the seriousness of the hate crime offense, the possibilities of proving motivational aspects of the hate crime, criminalizing hate, and introducing more severe punishments. They also debate the utilization of the civil versus the criminal code, the inclusion of different protected categories under hate crime legislation, the symbolic character of hate crime, and the social and political impact of hate crime legislation. This bibliography reviews key resources on hate crime legislation, including its historical context, its globalization, and the socio-criminological debate around hate crime legislation.

General Overviews

Scholars have dedicated a number of texts to the topic of hate crime, including some discussion around the legislative aspects that governments have introduced in varying countries. In the United States legislative context, Streissguth 2003 introduces the law of hate crime (chapter 2), referring to federal and state legislation and court cases, as well as providing a detailed chronology of hate crime history in the United States (chapter 3). Gerstenfeld 2013 (chapter 2) summarizes different legislative approaches to hate crime (e.g., penalty enhancement, substantive offense), including a discussion around specialized state laws, additional legislated regulations (i.e., recording of hate crime statistics, law enforcement training), as well as a discussion around the issue of hate speech in hate crime legislation. Levin and McDevitt 1993 discusses the four main categories of federal remedies for hate crime and the reasons for their limited use, as well as different state-level legislation, underlining these legislative frameworks with detailed example cases. Jenness and Grattet 2001 offers a detailed discussion of federal hate crime legislation in the United States, including information on the inclusion of different protected categories and the institutionalization of the law (chapter 3), as well as covering state-based legislation, including the different phrasing of hate motivation, variation in content, and the homogenization and differentiation of hate crime legislation in the United States (chapter 4). The legislative context on the European Continent is very diverse. Bleich 2007 briefly sums up how governments address hate crime in Britain, Germany, and France. In the Asia-Pacific region, McNamara 2002 reviews different legislative frameworks around racial vilification legislation utilized in different states and territories across Australia; some jurisdictions, however, did not address racial vilification until after 2002. Gelber and Stone 2007 is also a comprehensive edited book on anti-vilification legislation in Australia, additionally addressing freedom of speech concerns. On a more global scale, Winterdyk and Antonopoulos 2008 is a book on racist victimization that makes reference to hate crime legislation in multiple countries, including Australia, Canada, England and Wales, France, Germany, Greece, Japan, and the United States. Hall 2013 (chapter 7) examines theoretical and practical issues around hate crime legislation and law enforcement, discussing the United States and Britain. Gerstenfeld 2013 (chapter 8 and appendix A) draws attention to the issue of hate crime around the world, including a discussion of hate crime and legislative frameworks in five countries (Germany, the United Kingdom, Australia, Canada, and Croatia). Significant scholarship on hate crimes and hate crime legislation in Africa is still outstanding, and a substantial exploration of the topic is necessary.

  • Bleich, Erik. 2007. Hate crime policy in Western Europe: Responding to racist violence in Britain, Germany, and France. American Behavioral Scientist 51.2: 149–165.

    DOI: 10.1177/0002764207306047Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

    Discusses racist violence and the responses and policies implemented to tackle hate crime in three western European countries: Britain, Germany, and France.

    Find this resource:

    • Gelber, Katharine, and Adrienne Stone, eds. 2007. Hate speech and freedom of speech in Australia. Sydney: Federation Press.

      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

      Comprehensive edited volume on the questions and developments around anti-vilification legislation in Australia, including background information, practical implications, and human rights concerns. Suitable for anyone with a hate crime law focus.

      Find this resource:

      • Gerstenfeld, Phyllis B. 2013. Hate crimes: Causes, controls, and controversies. 3d ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

        This is a comprehensive interdisciplinary textbook on the topic of hate crime and is useful for both undergraduate and graduate students. It is the third edition of the original publication (2003), including suggested readings at the end of each chapter, as well as In Focus boxes and Narrative Portraits.

        Find this resource:

        • Hall, Nathan. 2013. Hate Crime. 2d ed. Crime and Society Series. New York: Routledge.

          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

          Cross-disciplinary accumulation of topics, including issues and theoretical perspectives around hate crime law and law enforcement, exploration of hate crime responses, and challenges for hate crime legislation. This second edition of the original publication (2005) is suitable for academics, undergraduate and postgraduate students, criminal justice practitioners, and policymakers.

          Find this resource:

          • Jenness, Valerie, and Ryken Grattet. 2001. Making hate a crime: From social movement to law enforcement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

            Provides a detailed account of the emergence and evolvement of hate crime legislation in the US context, including comprehensive chapters on federal and state-based legislation. Suitable for students and researchers interested in US-based hate crime legislation.

            Find this resource:

            • Levin, Jack, and Jack McDevitt. 1993. Hate crimes: The rising tide of bigotry and bloodshed. New York and London: Plenum.

              DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4899-6108-2Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

              Comprehensive account of the hate crime problem, covering a typology of hate offenses and effective responses to combat hate crime. Very detailed examples used throughout the book. Suitable for anyone interested in the issue of hate crime in the United States.

              Find this resource:

              • McNamara, Luke. 2002. Regulating racism: Racial vilification laws in Australia. Sydney: Institute of Criminology, Univ. of Sydney.

                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                Topical examination of racial vilification legislation in Australia. It includes the historical background, the operation of racial vilification laws up until 2002, and the role and limits of Australian hate crime legislation.

                Find this resource:

                • Streissguth, Thomas. 2003. Hate crimes. Library in a Book. New York: Facts on File.

                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                  Comprehensive introduction to hate crime literature in the American context. Provides students and researchers with additional materials, such as bibliographical listings and a fully annotated bibliography. Revised edition published in 2009.

                  Find this resource:

                  • Winterdyk, John, and Georgios Antonopoulos, eds. 2008. Racist victimization: International reflections and perspectives. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                    This is a broad-ranging edited volume covering racist victimization in an international comparative context. Contributors address the historical background, the legal system, and the extent of and response to hate crime in Australia, Canada, England and Wales, France, Germany, Greece, Japan, and the United States.

                    Find this resource:

                    Origins and Definitions of the Term “Hate Crime”

                    The term “hate crime” originated in the United States. Jenness 2007 discusses the relatively recent development of the term. No global definition for the term exists, however, due to country-specific cultural differences and differences in social norms and political interest. Definitions vary from broad to specific descriptions of what constitutes a hate crime. Gerstenfeld 2013 proposes definitions based on the hate crime context (chapter 2), while Garland 2012 explores the complexities linked to defining hate crime victimization. Green, et al. 2001 discusses multiple existing definitions of hate crime, and also presents the authors’ own definitional framework. Mason, et al. 2015 draws attention to how the definitional character of hate crime proves challenging to the enforcement of hate crime. Boeckmann and Turpin-Petrosino 2002 suggests definitions for hate crime, as well as for the related concept of hate speech. Lawrence 1999 describes hate crimes as an act of prejudice (chapter 1) and sets them apart from other crimes (chapter 2). In addition to theoretical explanations of hate crime, Walters 2011 discusses the difficulties involved in defining a hate crime. Scholars use additional terms in the hate crime literature, often interchangeably, including prejudice motivated crime, bias crime, and targeted violence. Definitions of the term “hate crime” not only differ between various scholars, but also between legislators, policymakers, and the media, based on the countries they reside in. The interchangeable and varying use of different terms referring to hate crime adds an additional element of complexity to finding an agreed-upon definition of hate crime, because racial violence, for example, can include a wide range of criminal and noncriminal behavior, and can range from racial slurs to genocide.

                    • Boeckmann, Robert J., and Carolyn Turpin-Petrosino. 2002. Understanding the harm of hate crime. Journal of Social Issues 58.2: 207–225.

                      DOI: 10.1111/1540-4560.00257Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                      Introduces a whole issue dedicated to hate crime and discusses matters regarding the definitional character of hate crime and hate speech, and of balancing freedom and equality. This issue includes interdisciplinary research on topics such as societal, perpetrator, and victim perspectives.

                      Find this resource:

                      • Garland, Jon. 2012. Difficulties in defining hate crime victimization. International Review of Victimology 18.1: 25–37.

                        DOI: 10.1177/0269758011422473Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                        Discusses the categorization of different identity groups under the hate crime umbrella, including arguments around vulnerable groups, such as disabled people, the elderly, and the homeless.

                        Find this resource:

                        • Gerstenfeld, Phyllis B. 2013. Hate crimes: Causes, controls, and controversies. 3d ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                          Provides a detailed account for anyone interested in topics regarding hate crime, including past and emerging debates; research on offenders, hate groups, and victims; an exploration of fighting hate crime; global problems and solutions; and the future of hate crime. First published in 2003.

                          Find this resource:

                          • Green, Donald P., Laurence H. McFalls, and Jennifer K. Smith. 2001. Hate crime: An emergent research agenda. Annual Review of Sociology 27.1: 479–504.

                            DOI: 10.1146/annurev.soc.27.1.479Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                            Discusses hate crime characteristics, such as target groups, illegal conduct, and motivation, and includes a description of theoretical perspectives, empirical results, and difficulties in regard to data collection, as well as suggested future directions.

                            Find this resource:

                            • Jenness, Valerie. 2007. The emergence, content, and institutionalization of hate crime law: How a diverse policy community produced a modern legal fact. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 3.1: 141–160.

                              DOI: 10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.3.081806.112733Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                              Provides an account of the beginnings of the recently established term “hate crime,” the developments of anti-hate-crime movements, and the criminalization and establishment of hate crime laws. Discusses issues around the constitutionality of hate crime law, as well as law enforcement responses.

                              Find this resource:

                              • Lawrence, Frederick M. 1999. Punishing hate: Bias crimes under American law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.

                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                Comprehensive account of the necessity of punishment for hate crimes, including discussions on why hate crimes should be considered worse than and different from other crimes, issues around laws being constitutional, and the federal role in prosecuting hate crime. Foundational for anyone interested in US hate crime legislation.

                                Find this resource:

                                • Mason, Gail, Jude McCulloch, and JaneMaree Maher. 2015. Policing hate crime: Markers for negotiating common ground in policy implementation. Policing and Society 1–18.

                                  DOI: 10.1080/10439463.2015.1013958Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                  Provides a discussion of police hate crime policy, utilizing the Prejudice Motivated Crime Strategy in Victoria, Australia, as a focal point. Links this strategy to community policing and vulnerable groups, and discusses the implementation of such an approach, as well as the markers of hate crime.

                                  Find this resource:

                                  • Walters, Mark A. 2011. A general theories of hate crime? Strain, doing difference and self control. Critical Criminology 19.4: 313–330.

                                    DOI: 10.1007/s10612-010-9128-2Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                    Discusses the intersection between three criminological theories in regard to hate crime: Merton’s strain theory, Perry’s “doing difference,” and Gottfredson and Hirschi’s theory of self-control, including a discussion of definitions of hate crime and the typology of hate crime offenders.

                                    Find this resource:

                                    Historical Context of Hate Crime Legislation

                                    In contrast to the long-standing history of hate crime, hate crime legislation is a fairly recent development. Scholars still debate which statutes historically constitute the first hate crime legislation in the United States, with some scholars arguing for the inclusion of civil rights statutes. Noticeable in a historical context is the absence of hate crime legislation in the United States before the 1960s and 1970s, which Turpin-Petrosino 2015 discusses (see chapters 2 and 3). Grattet and Jenness 2001 provides a detailed account on the evolution of hate crime legislation in the American context. Marshall and Farrell 2008 also discusses the early beginnings of hate crime legislation in the United States. Grattet, et al. 1998 reviews the early history of hate crime legislation in the United States from 1979 to 1995, and Lawrence 1999 also introduces the historical context (see “Historical Appendix”). Blazak 2011 briefly introduces the history of the hate crime legislation in the United States. Dixon and Gadd 2006 includes a historical account of the American origins of hate crime legislation, as well as the introduction of hate crime law in Britain. The Law Commission also assorted a report, Hate Crime: The Case for Extending the Existing Offences (Law Commission 2013), that chronicles the history of hate crime legislation in the United Kingdom. While provisions criminalizing hate crime are relatively recent, most countries have utilized existing statutes to bring to trial and punish hate crime offenders for a very long time.

                                    • Blazak, Randy. 2011. Isn’t every crime a hate crime?: The case for hate crime laws. Sociology Compass 5.4: 244–255.

                                      DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-9020.2011.00364.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                      Provides an overview of the historical beginnings of hate crime laws in the United States and issues around the constitutionality of hate crime legislation. Discusses the four elements of hate crime legislation: criminality, intent, perception, and protected statuses. Suitable for people with a basic understanding of hate crime laws.

                                      Find this resource:

                                      • Dixon, Bill, and David Gadd. 2006. Getting the message?: “New” Labour and the criminalization of “hate.” Criminology & Criminal Justice 6.3: 309–328.

                                        DOI: 10.1177/1748895806065532Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                        Briefly introduces hate crime legislation in the United States and the United Kingdom, as well as the context and interpretation of, and debate around, hate crime legislation. Includes a study in North Staffordshire about the social contexts and the motivation of those responsible for hate crimes.

                                        Find this resource:

                                        • Grattet, Ryken, and Valerie Jenness. 2001. The birth and maturation of hate crime policy in the United States. American Behavioral Scientist 45.4: 668–696.

                                          DOI: 10.1177/00027640121957420Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                          Discusses the evolution and diffusion of hate crime legislation in the US context. Provides an account of the transformation of social movements into legislative frameworks and the enforcement of hate crime laws.

                                          Find this resource:

                                          • Grattet, Ryken, Valerie Jenness, and Theodore R. Curry. 1998. The homogenization and differentiation of hate crime law in the United States, 1978 to 1995: Innovation and diffusion in the criminalization of bigotry. American Sociological Review 63.2: 286–307.

                                            DOI: 10.2307/2657328Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                            Discusses the diffusion of hate crime laws in the United States, including its institutionalization and criminalization. Considers hypotheses in regard to timing of adoption and content of hate crime laws, quantitatively analyzing state hate crime statutes between 1978 and 1995.

                                            Find this resource:

                                            • Law Commission. 2013. Hate crime: The case for extending the existing offences. Consultation Paper No 213. London: Law Commission.

                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                              See Appendix B: History of Hate Crime Legislation. Describes the history of hate crime legislation in the United Kingdom, including a description of three types of statutory provisions (aggravated offenses, offenses stirring up hatred, and enhanced sentencing) and a detailed timeline on the implementation of different acts. Suitable for individuals familiar with the legal aspects of hate crime.

                                              Find this resource:

                                              • Lawrence, Frederick M. 1999. Punishing hate: Bias crimes under American law. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univ. Press.

                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                Provides a comprehensive account on the necessity of punishment for hate crimes. Includes discussions on differences between hate crime and other crime, legal aspects around constitutionality, and the role of the federal government in prosecution. Foundational for people with an interest in US hate crime legislation.

                                                Find this resource:

                                                • Marshall, Ineke H., and Amy Farrell. 2008. United States of America. In Racist victimization: International reflections and perspectives. Edited by John Winterdyk and Georgios Antonopoulos, 185–208. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                  Provides an overview of racist victimization in the United States, including historical context, utilization of the term “racist victimization,” hate crime legislation, reporting and statistics, extent and nature of hate crimes, and racial profiling and other forms of power abuse, as well as legal, social, and political reactions to hate crime.

                                                  Find this resource:

                                                  • Turpin-Petrosino, Carolyn. 2015. Understanding hate crimes: Acts, motives, offenders, victims, and justice. New York: Routledge.

                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                    Provides a comprehensive account of the history and modern evolution of hate crime in the United States. Introduces criminological perspectives, considers the perpetrators and victims of hate crime, and describes the criminal justice system responses, international perspectives, and the future of hate crime.

                                                    Find this resource:

                                                    Hate Crime Legislation in the United States and Canada

                                                    In the late 1800s, the United States set out to implement federal statutes directed to protect African Americans and other minority groups (Gerstenfeld 2013). The first legal responses to prejudice and bias, however, date back to the early 20th century with statutes against racist organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan (Marshall and Farrell 2008). The United States emerged as the leader in implementing legislation to address hate victimization. Jenness and Grattet 1996 concentrates on the criminalization of hate in the United States. Shively 2005 also provides a comprehensive report on the literature and legislation regarding hate crime in America. Jenness 2007 addresses the emergence, content, and institutionalization of hate crime legislation in the United States, including a historical account, the criminalization of hate, and law enforcement practice. Krouse 2010, a report on hate crime legislation, provides a comprehensive account of US hate crime policy, including a historical account of the introduction of policies and legislation into the political and legislative agenda, as well as discussing federal legislation. Marshall and Farrell 2008 briefly introduces US hate crime legislation, including the Hate Crime Statistics Act (1990). With the United States taking the lead, the globalization of hate crime legislation soon followed. Wemmers, et al. 2008 addresses hate crime legislation in Canada, describing the historical background, Canadian hate crime legislation, and the criminalization of hate crime. Gerstenfeld 2013 (chapter 8) briefly examines hate crime legislation in Canada and compares the Canadian approach to the US framework. Walker 2010 provides a more comprehensive parliamentary report on Canadian hate crime legislation, including a discussion related to freedom of expression concerns.

                                                    • Gerstenfeld, Phyllis B. 2013. Hate crimes: Causes, controls, and controversies. 3d ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                      Comprehensive textbook on hate crime, considering the emerging debates, hate crime offenders, hate groups, and hate crime victims, as well as an exploration of the fight against hate crime, global problems and solutions, and the future of hate crime. The first edition was first published in 2003.

                                                      Find this resource:

                                                      • Jenness, Valerie. 2007. The emergence, content, and institutionalization of hate crime law: How a diverse policy community produced a modern legal fact. Annual Review of Law and Social Science 3.1: 141–160.

                                                        DOI: 10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.3.081806.112733Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                        Discusses the development of the term “hate crime,” as well as the expansion of anti-hate-crime movements, and the criminalization and establishment of hate crime laws. Includes a discussion of the constitutionality of hate crime law and law enforcement responses.

                                                        Find this resource:

                                                        • Jenness, Valerie, and Ryken Grattet. 1996. The criminalization of hate: A comparison of structural and polity influences on the passage of “bias-crime” legislation in the United States. Sociological Perspectives 39.1: 129–154.

                                                          DOI: 10.2307/1389346Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                          Considers the content, distribution, and criminalization of hate crime laws in the United States and quantitatively examines hate crime statutes and social indicator data to explore what shapes the adoption of “bias-motivated violence and intimidation” statutes.

                                                          Find this resource:

                                                          • Krouse, William J. 2010. Hate crime legislation. CRS-RL33403. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.

                                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                            Provides a comprehensive overview of hate crime legislation in the United States, including the historical evolution, federal hate crime legislation, and information on the federal hate crime statistics and congressional hate crime bills. Suitable for individuals with a law background and interest in more detailed US-based legislation.

                                                            Find this resource:

                                                            • Marshall, Ineke H., and Amy Farrell. 2008. United States of America. In Racist victimization: International reflections and perspectives. Edited by John Winterdyk and Georgios Antonopoulos, 185–208. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                              Discusses racist victimization in the United States in regard to history, terminology, legislation, reporting, and statistics. Considers the extent and nature of hate crimes, issues around racial profiling and power abuse, and legal, social, and political reactions to hate crime.

                                                              Find this resource:

                                                              • Shively, Michael. 2005. Study of literature and legislation on hate crime in America. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.

                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                Provides a comprehensive account and a systematic review of the literature and legislative context of hate crime in the United States. Focuses on state and federal legislative frameworks and key sources of data.

                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                • Walker, Julian. 2010. Canadian Anti-hate laws and freedom of expression. Parliament of Canada Report 2010–31-E. Ottawa: Parliament of Canada.

                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                  Discusses hate crime legislation and freedom of expression in the Canadian context, considering human rights laws and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as well as discussing hate provisions in the criminal code and analyzing Canadian hate crime laws and proposed amendments. Suitable for individuals with a law background. Revised in 2013.

                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                  • Wemmers, Jo-Anne, Lisette Lafontaine, and Louise Viau. 2008. Canada. In Racist victimization: International reflections and perspectives. Edited by John Winterdyk and Georgios Antonopoulos, 43–66. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                    Provides historical information regarding racist victimization and legislating racism, as well as discussing criminal victimization in Canada. Discusses the prevalence and nature of racist victimization, the impact on victims, and the social and judicial response to racist victimization.

                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                    Hate Crime Legislation in Europe

                                                                    Since the late1990s, and encouraged by the United States legislation and politics, other Western countries have explored the possibilities and implemented similar legislative frameworks to address racist violence (see Bleich 2007, cited under General Overviews). Different countries have responded to social and political movements and started the implementation of hate crime legislation at varying times. Iganski 1999 outlines the issue of racist violence and legislative instruments against racism and anti-Semitism in Britain, while Webster 2008 briefly addresses the circumstances surrounding and legislative approaches to hate crime legislation in England and Wales. Albrecht 2008 briefly introduces racist victimization legislation in Germany, including a historical overview, the extent and nature of racist victimization, and an explanation of racist victimization in Germany. Body-Gendrot 2008 briefly discusses France’s legislative framework regarding racist victimization and also introduces the historical aspects, the extent and nature, and reactions to hate crime in France, while Petoussi-Douli 2008 introduces these facts regarding Greece’s approach to hate crime legislation. Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights and Jernow 2009 is a detailed report on different aspects for governments to consider in regards to reviewing and implementing hate crime legislation in different countries around Europe. Thomas 2004 reviews hate crime legislation across Europe, describing states with minimal measures, as well as states with comprehensive measures battling hate crime, and considering country by country reports describing legislative provisions and additional initiatives. European Commission against Racism and Intolerance 2014 provides a comprehensive list of European countries and their legislative frameworks.

                                                                    • Albrecht, Hans-Joerg. 2008. Germany. In Racist victimization: International reflections and perspectives. Edited by John Winterdyk and Georgios Antonopoulos, 113–138. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

                                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                      Provides an overview of the history and extent of racist victimization, as well as addressing the legal aspects and explanations of racist crime in Germany. Brief overview for anyone interested in the hate crime context in Germany, including aspects of legislative responses.

                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                      • Body-Gendrot, Sophie. 2008. France. In Racist victimization: International reflections and perspectives. Edited by John Winterdyk and Georgios Antonopoulos, 89–112. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

                                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                        Addresses the extent and nature of racist victimization in France and discusses the historical background, including the criminalization and legislation against hate, and the social and political reactions to racist victimization.

                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                        • European Commission against Racism and Intolerance. 2014. Legal measures to combat racism and intolerance in the member States of the Council of Europe. Strasbourg, France: Council of Europe.

                                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                          Provides an extensive list of European member states with links to documents addressing legislation combating racism and intolerance for each individual country. Suitable for individuals exploring the legislative context of hate crime in European countries.

                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                          • Iganski, Paul. 1999. Legislating against hate: Outlawing racism and antisemitism in Britain. Critical Social Policy 19.1: 129–141.

                                                                            DOI: 10.1177/026101839901900102Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                            Addresses the utilization of legislation to combat racism and anti-Semitism, considers moral and practical issues in relation to hate crime legislation, and argues that there is no injustice regarding the rights of the perpetrators.

                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                            • Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, and Allison Jernow. 2009. Hate crime laws—A practical guide. Vienna: Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE).

                                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                              Provides a simple and clear guide to understand practicable consequences of legislative frameworks. Suitable for individuals or governments interested in reviewing European hate crime legislation or improving their existing legislative hate crime framework.

                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                              • Petoussi-Douli, Vassiliki. 2008. Greece. In Racist victimization: International reflections and perspectives. Edited by John Winterdyk and Georgios Antonopoulos, 139–168. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                Discusses the historical aspects, such as immigration patterns and the emergence of racism; the legal context; and the extent and nature of and reactions to racist violence in Greece. Suitable for individuals with an interest in racist violence in Greece.

                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                • Thomas, Rebecca. 2004. Legislative provisions for hate crime across EU member states. Belfast, UK: Institute for Conflict Research.

                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                  Detailed report examining the legislative frameworks in multiple European countries. Addresses aspects of legislative frameworks, such as constitutional measures and the collection and reporting of data, and indicates states utilizing few or comprehensive measures regarding hate crime. Suitable for individuals with a law background interested in different legislative frameworks in Europe.

                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                  • Webster, Colin. 2008. England and Wales. In Racist victimization: International reflections and perspectives. Edited by John Winterdyk and Georgios Antonopoulos, 67–88. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

                                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                    Introduces legislation against racist victimization in England and Wales, considering information on Britain’s ethnic profile, the historical background, hate crime perpetrators, and patterns and trends of, as well as the responses, to racist victimization. Suitable for anyone interested in the topic of racist victimization in England and Wales.

                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                    Hate Crime Legislation in the Asia-Pacific Region

                                                                                    Similar to the United States and the European realm, governments in Australia introduced hate crime legislation in response to social movements from historically oppressed groups. Compared to the rapid spread of hate crime legislation in the United States, Australia had a slow introduction to implementing legislation to address hate violence. Jayasuriya 2012 introduces Australian federal and state-based legislation, including a historic account of the emergence, proposals, and amendments for racial vilification legislation (chapter 3), and a review of the Racial Discrimination Act and Australian multiculturalism (chapter 4). McNamara 2002 provides a comprehensive account of Australian hate crime legislation introduced before 2002, including a historical account (chapter 1), the federal legislative model (chapter 2), and four different state and territory legislative models (chapters 3–6). Stobbs 2008 also briefly addresses racist victimization in Australia, mentioning patterns of and legislative and social responses to hate crime. Walters 2005 provides a discussion of antidiscrimination legislation and the use of punishment enhancers in Australia, while Mason 2009 examines whether hate crime laws in Australia are achieving their intended goal. Gelber and Stone 2007 is a comprehensive article collection on hate speech and freedom of speech, including contributions on the practical regulation of hate speech and the emergence of a human rights framework (also comparing Australia with New Zealand). Sydney Institute of Criminology 2013 provides links to hate crime legislation across Australia, including related court cases. Literature about hate crime legislation in the Asian region is scarce; however, Fenwick 2008 introduces the issue of racist victimization in Japan, examining the myth of homogeneity and the existence of ethnic diversity, as well as noting the lack of legislative frameworks in regard to racist victimization.

                                                                                    • Fenwick, Mark. 2008. Japan. In Racist victimization: International reflections and perspectives. Edited by John Winterdyk and Georgios Antonopoulos, 169–184. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

                                                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                      Considers the myth of homogeneity, the existence of ethnic diversity, and the criminal justice context around racial victimization in Japan. Suitable for individuals interested in racial victimization in Japan.

                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                      • Gelber, Katharine, and Adrienne Stone, eds. 2007. Hate speech and freedom of speech in Australia. Sydney: Federation Press.

                                                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                        Comprehensive edited volume on topics related to hate speech and freedom of speech in Australia, including regulatory, practical, and human rights frameworks. Suitable for anyone interested in hate speech and freedom of speech in Australia.

                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                        • Jayasuriya, Laksiri. 2012. Transforming a “White Australia”: Issues of racism and immigration. New Delhi: SSS Publications.

                                                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                          Covers topics such as Australia’s history of immigration and multiculturalism, legislating against racism and hate, and Australia’s connection to the Asian continent. Suitable for anyone interested in racism and immigration issues in Australia.

                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                          • Mason, Gail. 2009. Hate crime laws in Australia: Are they achieving their goals? Criminal Law Journal 33:326–340.

                                                                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                            Discusses legislative developments and the general purpose of hate crime law, and points out three different penal models in regard to Australian hate crime legislation. Considers court decisions regarding sentence aggravation provisions and argues for social justice in keeping pedophiles out of the hate crime context.

                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                            • McNamara, Luke. 2002. Regulating racism: Racial vilification laws in Australia. Sydney: Institute of Criminology, Univ. of Sydney.

                                                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                              Provides an examination of state, territory, and federal racial vilification legislation in Australia. Covers the historical and operational context of racial vilification laws up until 2002, and discusses the role and limits of Australian hate crime legislation.

                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                              • Stobbs, Nigel. 2008. Australia. In Racist victimization: International reflections and perspectives. Edited by John Winterdyk and Georgios Antonopoulos, 19–41. Aldershot, UK, and Burlington, VT: Ashgate.

                                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                Discusses the historical background, the nature and extent of, and the legal, agency, and social responses to racist victimization in Australia. Suitable for anyone interested in racist victimization in Australia.

                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                • Sydney Institute of Criminology. 2013. New South Wales (NSW). Sydney: Sydney Institute of Criminology.

                                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                  Provides a detailed account of legislative frameworks across Australia in terms of hate crime legislation, including exact sections in legislative texts and related court cases. Includes federal, state, and territory legislation, as well as international examples. Suitable for individuals interested in statutes and court cases around hate crime in Australia.

                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                  • Walters, Mark. 2005. Hate crimes in Australia: Introducing punishment enhancers. Criminal Law Journal 29.4: 201–216.

                                                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                    Demonstrates the operation of hate crime legislation and briefly discusses hate crime legislation in the United States and United Kingdom. Considers the justification and debate around hate crime legislation, takes the severity of hate crime into account, and introduces legislative frameworks utilized in Australia.

                                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                                    Common Features of Hate Crime Legislation

                                                                                                    North America, Europe, and the Asia-Pacific region have approached the problem of hate crime and the implementation of legislation in different ways. Hate crime legislation in varying countries, as well as different states in these countries, differs in the protection of categories, the use of the civil or criminal code, and punishment outcomes for convicted offenders. Jenness and Grattet 2001 points out five types of legal strategies contained in hate crime legislation, including the criminalization of interference with civil rights, “freestanding” statutes, “coattailing” statutes, the modification of a preexisting statute, and penalty enhancement statutes (chapter 4). Blazak 2011 offers four basic elements that need to be present in hate crime legislation: criminal offense, intent, perception, and protected statuses. Jacobs and Potter 1997 suggests three types of hate crime law in the United States: substantive hate crime statutes, sentence enhancement hate crime statutes, and hate crime reporting statutes. Mason 2009 discusses three broad penal models addressing hate crime internationally: the penalty enhancement model, the sentence aggravation model, and the substantive offense model. Mason 2014 suggests three general denominators of hate crime legislation, including being a crime with a prejudice element, directed toward a group attribute or characteristic, and the imposition of an additional penalty. Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights and Jernow 2009 offers a practical guide to hate crime legislation, addressing different policy questions, such as the use of different legislative framework, the inclusion of protected categories, and the definition of the hate motive.

                                                                                                    • Blazak, Randy. 2011. Isn’t every crime a hate crime?: The case for hate crime laws. Sociology Compass 5.4: 244–255.

                                                                                                      DOI: 10.1111/j.1751-9020.2011.00364.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                      Discusses the historical context and constitutional issues in the United States, and discusses the four elements of hate crime legislation. Suitable for people with a basic understanding of hate crime laws.

                                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                                      • Jacobs, James B., and Kimberly A. Potter. 1997. Hate crimes: A critical perspective. Crime and Justice 22:1–50.

                                                                                                        DOI: 10.1086/449259Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                        Addresses the definition of hate crime, the extent of hate crime and data gathering efforts, and discusses the portrayal of hate crime, its perpetrators, and its victims. Analyzes criminal justice system responses to the hate crime problem.

                                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                                        • Jenness, Valerie, and Ryken Grattet. 2001. Making hate a crime: From social movement to law enforcement. New York: Russell Sage Foundation.

                                                                                                          Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                          Provides a detailed account of hate crime legislation in the United States. Includes the historical context of hate crime and related legislation, and discusses criminal justice responses to hate crime in the United States. Suitable for students and researchers interested in hate crime legislation in the US context.

                                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                                          • Mason, Gail. 2009. Hate crime laws in Australia: Are they achieving their goals? Criminal Law Journal 33:326–340.

                                                                                                            Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                            Provides a discussion of the development, purpose, and three penal models of hate crime legislation in Australia, addressing court decisions utilizing sentence aggravation provisions and arguments for keeping pedophiles out of the hate crime context.

                                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                                            • Mason, Gail. 2014. Legislating against hate. In The Routledge international handbook on hate crime. Edited by Nathan Hall, Abbee Corb, Paul Giannasi, and John G. D. Grieve, 59–68. London and New York: Routledge.

                                                                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                              Demonstrates the theoretical and conceptual issues of hate crime legislation and examines the common elements that distinguish hate crime from parallel crime under the law. This edited collection is suitable for academics, students, and practitioners interested in the topic of hate crime.

                                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                                              • Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights, and Allison Jernow. 2009. Hate crime laws—A practical guide. Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE).

                                                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                Provides simple and clear information about hate crime and hate crime legislation, including a discussion of policy questions regarding the implementation of hate crime legislation. Suitable for individuals or governments reviewing or improving their existing knowledge of hate crime in Europe.

                                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                                The Issue of Protected Categories

                                                                                                                Hate crime legislation stipulates categories that are protected under the law. Without the inclusion of certain categories in the legislative text, these categories will lack protection under hate crime statutes. Spieldenner and Glenn 2014 points out the lack of consistency in protected categories in hate crime legislation, and addresses how the criminal justice system, as well as the media, influences the communities’ understanding of hate crime. Mason-Bish 2013 discusses the prosecution of rape and domestic violence, and also considers age and gender under the protection of hate crime statutes. Wellman 2006 argues for the inclusion of rape and domestic violence under hate crime legislation. Mason 2009 examines the utilization of pedophiles as a protected category under hate crime statutes in Australia. Jurisdictions typically do not consider pedophiles as a vulnerable group, and globally they do not offer protection to pedophiles under hate crime statutes. Mason 2014, however, discusses two unique and recent Australian cases, where courts employed hate crime legislation to protect pedophiles, and explores if this protection is justified. Ardill and Wardle 2009 argues for the protection of sex offenders under hate crime legislation, as some legislative frameworks utilize open-ended categories, allowing for the inclusion of other or similar groups, in their legislative frameworks. Umemoto and Mikami 2000 explores the inclusion of minority group gang violence as hate crimes if turf rivalry appears to not be the primary motive. Garland 2010 discusses the victimization of goths and examines if governments should treat their victimization as a hate crime, and therefore grant goths protection under hate crime legislation. Garland and Hodkinson 2014 also considers the protection of goth cultures in addition to other alternative subcultures, such as individuals from the punk scene, as victims of hate crimes.

                                                                                                                • Ardill, Allan, and Ben Wardle. 2009. Firebombs and Ferguson: A review of hate crime laws as applied to child sex offenders. Alternative Law Journal 34.4: 257–259.

                                                                                                                  Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                  Reviews child sex offenders as a protected category under hate crime legislation, and argues that such an inclusion does not undermine hate crime legislation but rather promotes less violence in society.

                                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                                  • Garland, Jon. 2010. The victimization of goths and the boundaries of hate crime. In Hate crime: Concepts, policy, future directions. Edited by Neil Chakraborti, 40–57. Cullompton, UK, and Portland, OR: Willan.

                                                                                                                    Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                    Discusses the victimization of individuals in the goth subculture, considers the Sophie Lancaster murder and trial, examines difficulties around the nature and frequency of their victimization, and offers a comparison to other forms of hate crime.

                                                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                                                    • Garland, Jon, and Paul Hodkinson. 2014. Alternative subcultures and hate crime. In The Routledge international handbook on hate crime. Edited by Nathan Hall, Abbee Corb, Paul Giannasi, and John G. D. Grieve, 226–236. London and New York: Routledge.

                                                                                                                      Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                      Discusses the protection of alternative subcultures under hate crime legislation, explores key arguments regarding the debate of including the victimization of individuals belonging to alternative subcultures as a hate crime, and raises questions regarding the concept of hate crime.

                                                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                                                      • Mason, Gail. 2009. Prejudice and paedophilia in hate crime laws: Dunn v. R. Alternative Law Journal 34.4: 253–256.

                                                                                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                        Discusses the Australian court case Dunn v. R, issues around ranking pedophilia as a sexual orientation, and argues against the inclusion of pedophilia under hate crime legislation.

                                                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                                                        • Mason, Gail. 2014. Victim attributes in hate crime law: Difference and the politics of justice. British Journal of Criminology 54.2: 161–179.

                                                                                                                          DOI: 10.1093/bjc/azt073Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                          Considers the inclusion of pedophiles as victims of hate crime under the criminal law, reviews two related Australian court cases, and discusses the criteria important for victim protection under hate crime statutes.

                                                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                                                          • Mason-Bish, Hannah. 2013. Examining the boundaries of hate crime policy: Considering age and gender. Criminal Justice Policy Review 24.3: 297–316.

                                                                                                                            DOI: 10.1177/0887403411431495Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                            Provides information on the consideration and dismissal of certain categories under the protection of hate crime legislation. Focuses especially on the exclusion of age and gender under hate crime provisions in Britain.

                                                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                                                            • Spieldenner, Andrew R., and Cerise L. Glenn. 2014. Scripting hate crimes: Victim, space and perpetrator defining hate. Continuum: Journal of Media & Cultural Studies 28.1: 123–135.

                                                                                                                              DOI: 10.1080/10304312.2013.854873Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                              Addresses hate crime categorization in the criminal justice system and the media, including a discussion of two separate attacks on gay men of different ethnicity in the United States, as well as examining the different contextualization of these events.

                                                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                                                              • Umemoto, Karen, and C. Kimi Mikami. 2000. Profile of race-bias hate crime in Los Angeles County. Western Criminology Review 2.2.

                                                                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                Analyzes law enforcement data to explore gang-related race-bias hate crimes in Los Angeles from 1994 to 1997, and maps hate crime occurrences in geographically defined areas.

                                                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                • Wellman, Christopher H. 2006. A defense of stiffer penalties for hate crimes. Hypatia 21.2: 62–80.

                                                                                                                                  DOI: 10.1111/j.1527-2001.2006.tb01094.xSave Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                  Discusses penalty enhancement for hate crimes, as well as theories linked to punishment, and points out arguments for more severe punishment. Considers rape and domestic violence as crimes deserving of punishment under hate crime statutes.

                                                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                  The Hate Crime Legislation Debate

                                                                                                                                  Scholars continuously debate the necessity of separate legislation to address hate crime. Scholars address debatable topics, such as the seriousness of hate crime compared to parallel crime; issues related to proving motivation; the criminalization of, and more severe punishment, for hate crimes; the symbolic character and social and political impact of hate crime legislation, and protected categories under hate crime legislation. Gerstenfeld 2013 examines the hate crime legislation debate, including constitutional and policy problems (chapter 3), while Franklin 2002 discusses difficulties involved in proving the hate motive, hate crime legislation disproportionately punishing minority groups, the deterrent value of hate crime legislation, and the social and political impact of legislation. Sullaway 2004 also reviews objections to hate crime legislation, discussing difficulties with determining hate motivation, the punishment of ideas and attitudes, protected speech issues, and the increased harm concerning hate crime victims. Al-Hakim 2010 critics the argument in Hurd 2001 that hate crime legislation punishes an undesirable character trait, and asserts that punishment enhancement is justified. Iganski 1999 addresses the objectives behind the implementation of hate crime legislation in Britain and discusses the importance of a separate set of legislation to criminalize hate. In opposition to the debate about why hate crime legislation is necessary, Jacobs 1993 argues against the implementation of hate crime legislation. Jacobs and Potter 1998 examines and critiques frequent justifications for hate crime legislation, including issues such as the culpability of offenders, the harmful impacts on hate crime victims, the creation of intergroup tension, and the deterrent effect and moral education of hate crime legislation.

                                                                                                                                  • Al-Hakim, Mohamad. 2010. Making room for hate crime legislation in liberal societies. Criminal Law and Philosophy 4.3: 341–358.

                                                                                                                                    DOI: 10.1007/s11572-010-9095-4Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                    Considers Heidi Hurd’s arguments in Hurd 2001 regarding the unfair targeting of character traits, discusses the shortcomings of Hurd’s views, and demonstrates that such punishment of character traits under hate crime legislation is justified.

                                                                                                                                    Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                    • Franklin, Karen. 2002. Good intentions: The enforcement of hate crime penalty-enhancement statutes. American Behavioral Scientist 46.1: 154–172.

                                                                                                                                      DOI: 10.1177/0002764202046001010Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                      Discusses the police enforcement of hate crime, issues for prosecutors around proving motivation, the disproportionate punishment of minority groups, offenders and their motivation, the deterrent effects of hate crime legislation, and the social and political impact.

                                                                                                                                      Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                      • Gerstenfeld, Phyllis B. 2013. Hate crimes: Causes, controls, and controversies. 3d ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

                                                                                                                                        Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                        Provides a comprehensive interdisciplinary textbook of topics related to hate crime, including its history, legislation, and debates surrounding it, and addresses topics related to offenders, hate groups, and victims, as well as the fight against, the globalization, and the future of hate. Originally published in 2003, the volume is useful for undergraduate and graduate students.

                                                                                                                                        Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                        • Hurd, Heidi M. 2001. Why liberals should hate “hate crime legislation.” Law and Philosophy 20.2: 215–232.

                                                                                                                                          DOI: 10.1023/A:1010661127873Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                          Focuses on the legitimacy of criminalizing hatred and bias, including a discussion of the differences between hate crime and parallel crime, the moral and political implications, and character theories in the hate crime context.

                                                                                                                                          Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                          • Iganski, Paul. 1999. Why make “hate” a crime? Critical Social Policy 19.3: 386–395.

                                                                                                                                            DOI: 10.1177/026101839901900306Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                            Discusses the objectives behind hate crime legislation, including the deterrent effect, the promotion of social cohesion, and the means and impetus for criminal justice responses. Argues for legislation having a significant impact on criminal justice system agencies.

                                                                                                                                            Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                            • Jacobs, James B. 1993. Should hate be a crime. The Public Interest 113:3–14.

                                                                                                                                              Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                              Suggests that criminal law is the wrong instrument when dealing with prejudice, and discusses issues surrounding the hate motive, freedom of speech concerns, political controversy, protected categories, and deterrence.

                                                                                                                                              Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                              • Jacobs, James B., and Kimberly A. Potter. 1998. Hate crimes: Criminal law and identity politics. Oxford and New York: Oxford Univ. Press.

                                                                                                                                                Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                Provides a critical stance on using criminal law to address hate crime, covering topics such as the politics, justification, and enforcement of hate crime laws, as well as addressing the constitutional aspects and identity politics regarding hate crime. Suitable for academics interested in the debate on hate crime legislation.

                                                                                                                                                Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                • Sullaway, Megan. 2004. Psychological perspectives on hate crime laws. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law 10.3: 250–292.

                                                                                                                                                  DOI: 10.1037/1076-8971.10.3.250Save Citation »Export Citation »E-mail Citation »

                                                                                                                                                  Considers objections regarding hate crime legislation, utilizing psychological theory and research, including topics such as the determination of bias intent or motivation, a comparison of hate and other motives, a discussion of psychological causes as defense strategies, the creation of intergroup tension through legislation, and further suggested research and policy implications.

                                                                                                                                                  Find this resource:

                                                                                                                                                  back to top

                                                                                                                                                  Article

                                                                                                                                                  Up

                                                                                                                                                  Down