public policy advocacy

Hate Crimes and Incidents Statement

Introduction

Current federal hate crimes law (18 U.S.C. 245), passed by Congress in 1968, permits the federal prosecution of a hate crime only if it was motivated by bias based on race, color, national origin and the assailant intended to prevent the victim from exercising a “federally protected right” such as the right to vote or attend school. Because the crime has to meet both requirements, these stipulations substantially limit the likelihood of federal prosecution of hate crimes even when the crime is particularly heinous. It does not include sexual orientation, gender, or disability. Of particular concern in this context is that hate crimes committed against lesbian, gay, bi-sexual and transgender (GLBT) people are on the rise nationwide. Also, many states and cities have failed to report hate crime data while deficient reporting occurs in others. YWCA USA has an excellent fact sheet (November 2006) on hate crimes from the national perspective. It has also identified hate crimes as one of its priority issues.

Washington State has a broader malicious harassment law which covers acts committed against a person because of his/her race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, or mental, physical, or sensory disability. However, an act only qualifies as malicious harassment if it:

• Causes physical injury to the victim or another person.
• Causes physical damage or destruction of the property of the victim or another person.
• Words alone do not constitute malicious harassment unless the context or circumstances surrounding the words indicate the words are a threat.

A recent front page article “Racial harassment sends Vancouver woman packing” in The Columbian, Sunday, November 19, highlights the complexity of applying the malicious harassment law to real life situations. In one incident cited in the article, the perpetrator used temporary paint to spray a racial slur across the windshield of the victim’s car, which led the investigating officer to conclude that there was no permanent damage and thus no crime.

Anecdotal evidence presented at Washington State Human Rights Commission forums in Clark County in 2005-2006 and during Social Justice Interest Group meetings in 2004-2005 also suggests that local law enforcement authorities and elected officials are often cautious about publicly acknowledging and addressing hate crimes and incidents. This may be due in part to concerns about the public image of the community, but also to questions about whether certain incidents meet the legal definition of a crime. Other examples of the latter in recent years include the placement of hate messages in Easter eggs in Esther Park and the throwing of hate literature being wrapped around rocks onto lawns in several neighborhoods in Vancouver. Whether or not such incidents meet the legal definition of a crime, they can and often do leave lasting wounds.

Public Policy Statement on Hate Crimes and Incidents

YWCA Clark County supports the passage of hate crimes legislation that protects people from harassment, violence and other crimes on the basis of race, sex, gender, religion, ethnicity, age, disability, or sexual orientation.

The YWCA supports open public acknowledgement and thorough reporting of hate crimes and incidents in our community and prosecution of crimes to the full extent of the law. It also supports a strong, concerted community response to both hate crimes and hate incidents that fail to meet the legal definition of a crime.