In the early 1980s, a new category of crime appeared in the criminal law lexicon. In response to concerted advocacy-group lobbying, Congress and many state legislatures passed a wave of "hate crime" laws requiring the collection of statistics on, and enhancing the punishment for, crimes motivated by certain prejudices. This book places the evolution of the hate crime concept in socio-legal perspective. James B. Jacobs and Kimberly Potter adopt a skeptical if not critical stance, maintaining that legal definitions of hate crime are riddled with ambiguity and subjectivity. No matter how hate crime is defined, and despite an apparent media consensus to the contrary, the authors find no evidence to support the claim that the United States is experiencing a hate crime epidemic--instead, they cast doubt on whether the number of hate crimes is even increasing. The authors further assert that, while the federal effort to establish a reliable hate crime accounting system has failed, data collected for this purpose have led to widespread misinterpretation of the state of intergroup relations in this country. The book contends that hate crime as a socio-legal category represents the elaboration of an identity politics now manifesting itself in many areas of the law. But the attempt to apply the anti-discrimination paradigm to criminal law generates problems and anomalies. For one thing, members of minority groups are frequently hate crime perpetrators. Moreover, the underlying conduct prohibited by hate crime law is already subject to criminal punishment. Jacobs and Potter question whether hate crimes are worse or more serious than similar crimes attributable to other anti-social motivations. They also argue that the effort to single out hate crime for greater punishment is, in effect, an effort to punish some offenders more seriously simply because of their beliefs, opinions, or values, thus implicating the First Amendment. Advancing a provocative argument in clear and persuasive terms, Jacobs and Potter show how the recriminalization of hate crime has little (if any) value with respect to law enforcement or criminal justice. Indeed, enforcement of such laws may exacerbate intergroup tensions rather than eradicate prejudice.

Hate speech law can be found throughout the world. But it is also the subject of numerous principled arguments, both for and against. These principles invoke a host of morally relevant features (e.g., liberty, health, autonomy, security, non-subordination, the absence of oppression, human dignity, the discovery of truth, the acquisition of knowledge, self-realization, human excellence, civic dignity, cultural diversity and choice, recognition of cultural identity, intercultural dialogue, participation in democratic self-government, being subject only to legitimate rule) and practical considerations (e.g., efficacy, the least restrictive alternative, chilling effects). The book develops and then critically examines these various principled arguments. It also attempts to de-homogenize hate speech law into different clusters of laws/regulations/codes that constrain uses of hate speech, so as to facilitate a more nuanced examination of the principled arguments. Finally, it argues that it is morally fitting for judicial and legislative judgments about the overall warrant of hate speech law to reflect principled compromise. Principled compromise is characterized not merely by compromise over matters of principled concern but also by compromise which is itself governed by ideals of moral duty or civic virtue (e.g., reciprocity, equality, and mutual respect). The Open Access version of this book, available at https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315714899, has been made available under a Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives 4.0 license.

This Handbook presents current and future studies on the changing dynamics of the role of immigrants and the impact of immigration, across the United States and industrialized and developing nations. It covers the changing dynamics of race, ethnicity, and immigration, and discusses how it all contributes to variations in crime, policing, and the overall justice system. Through acknowledging that some groups, especially people of color, are disproportionately influenced more than others in the case of criminal justice reactions, the “War on Drugs”, and hate crimes; this Handbook introduces the importance of studying race and crime so as to better understand it. It does so by recommending that researchers concentrate on ethnic diversity in a national and international context in order to broaden their demographic and expand their understanding of how to attain global change. Featuring contributions from top experts in the field, The Handbook of Race and Crime is presented in five sections—An Overview of Race, Ethnicity, Crime, and Justice; Theoretical Perspectives on Race and Crime; Race, Gender, and the Justice System; Gender and Crime; and Race, Gender and Comparative Criminology. Each section of the book addresses a key area of research, summarizes findings or shortcomings whenever possible, and provides new results relevant to race/crime and justice. Every contribution is written by a top expert in the field and based on the latest research. With a sharp focus on contemporary race, ethnicity, crime, and justice studies, The Handbook of Race and Crime is the ideal reference for advanced undergraduate students, graduate students, and scholars interested in the disciplines such as Criminology, Race and Ethnicity, Race and the Justice System, and the Sociology of Race.

This book offers a critical analysis of hate crime law using Italy as a case study. Employing a multidisciplinary approach, it develops an international framework for mapping hate crime laws onto the phenomenon of hate crime itself, allowing for better legislation to be drafted. It shows how this analytical tool may be used in practice by applying it to legislation in Italy, where Parliament recently dismissed a legislative proposal to extend hate crime law to sex, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, and disability. The framework allows readers to critique the rationale behind hate crime laws and the effect of, or potential effect of, their implementation. This book ultimately seeks to answer to the question of how and whether States can legitimately introduce a harsher sentence for bias motivated crimes. It bridges interdisciplinary hate studies and more traditional legal analysis. It speaks to an international audience as well as to an audience with a specific interest in the Italian context.

In The Name of Hate is the first book to offer a comprehensive theory of hate crimes, arguing for an expansion of the legal definitions that most states in the U.S. hold. Barbara Perry provides an historical understanding of hate crimes and provocatively argues that hate crimes are not an aberration of current society, but rather a by-product of a society still grappling with inequality, difference, fear, and hate.

Presenting the results of an 18 month empirical study examining the use of restorative justice for hate crime in the United Kingdom, this book draws together theory and practice to analyse the causes and consequences of hate crime victimisation.