By Andy Brack, editor and publisher | People motivated by hate or prejudice to act criminally against those who are different may face a felony charge if a state hate crimes bill becomes law.
South Carolina is one of five states nationally that does not protect people from hateful acts done because of race, religion, skin color, sex, age, national origin or sexual orientation. There is a federal hate crimes law, which was used last week to add 33 federal charges against Dylann Roof, the 21-year-old man accused of slaughtering nine churchgoers in Charleston on June 17.
In January, S.C. Reps. Seth Whipper and Robert Brown, Democrats from Charleston, introduced a measure to create a felony for anyone who injures or destroys property “with the intent to assault, intimidate, or threaten a person because of his race, religion, color, sex, age, national origin, or sexual orientation.” [H. 3404]. As drafted, the measure would carry a fine of $2,000 to $10,000 or imprisonment from two to 15 years, or both.
Since being introduced, it has been dormant on the House Judiciary Committee’s calendar. But with the attention to hate crimes after Roof’s arrest and to South Carolina’s history of race relations as the Confederate flag was removed from the Statehouse grounds, Whipper said he believed there may be support for moving forward with hate crimes legislation.
“It’s still alive and can get done in one legislative session with the right kind of support,” he said, adding that he would be looking for co-sponsors from both parties in the months ahead. “If you start talking about meaningful, substantive and measureable change, passing the hate crimes bill would be one way to do that.”
Why the state should pass the bill
“We need a hate crimes bill,” said Whipper, a North Charleston lawyer who once served as a county magistrate. “What criminal laws do is hopefully discourage certain criminal behavior. They also establish community values.
“What we’re saying with the hate crimes bill is there is certain behavior that is abhorrent and repugnant and we think it deserves special attention from the criminal justice system.”
As drafted, the bill would give prosecutors an additional charge for instances when people act out of hate or because someone is different — just because they are different, he said.
“If the person’s civil rights become an issue or if you are attacking them because they’re different from you … you get extra punishment.”
Whipper emphasized that a state hate crimes bill is needed for criminal acts beyond murder, from burning crosses in people’s yards to damaging property to making threatening or intimidating phone calls because of someone’s race or agenda.
“These crimes happen in a way they shouldn’t be tolerated … and they should be punished for what they are and stop them from creating a tolerance for dehumanizing people. You shouldn’t have to have a kidnapping with a murder if it’s race-based to take it to the next level of punishment.”
Why the bill may not be needed
State Sen. Larry Martin, a Pickens County Republican who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee, said he was looking forward to debate on any hate crimes bill that is in the Senate. No bill has been introduced, but such a measure would be considered if approved by the House.
But he wondered if special legislation were needed with all of the current laws on the books.
“Judges have pretty wide latitude to express the outrage of society, especially if nothing more than putrid hatred drove the crime,” he said.
Having a hate crimes bill in the state would be an easy issue if it were for the kind of crimes that Roof is charged with, Martin said, adding, “I don’t know how much more outrage society can provide for the crime than our capital punishment law.”
But the American legal system demands that justice be fair — as if it were blindfolded so it could remain neutral.
“That’s an aspect of the judicial system that I think the folks who are crying out for the hate crimes law, if you think about it, are somewhat requesting Lady Justice to take that blindfold off,” Martin said. “I just don’t know. I want to hear the arguments.”
He added that he had no interest in being the only state in the nation to have no hate crimes law.
“We’ll look at it but I do have some very genuine concerns that you do it in a way other than making statement,” he said. “The code of laws is full of ample law to prosecute on behalf of practically any victim of a crime and judges to have significant latitude in how they impose sentences.”
Even the American Civil Liberties Union, a longtime supporter of civil rights legislation, struggles a bit with hate crimes legislation. There’s a delicate balance that must protect First Amendment rights of free speech and association from “guilt by association,” a spokesman said.
“For the ACLU, there needs to be a clear and direct connection between speech/association and the crime.”
What’s next
During the June special session which led to the General Assembly voting to take down the Confederate flag, an effort to allow lawmakers to talk about hate crimes was tabled.
But the flag vote showed there was real interest in doing the right thing, Whipper said, adding that momentum might propel the hate crimes proposal forward in the House next year.
Andy Brack is editor and publisher of Statehouse Report. Have a comment? Send to: feedback@statehousereport.com
We Can Do Better, South Carolina!