Today at a ceremony, President Obama signed into law a federal hate crimes. Obama said the bill was a step toward change to "help protect our citizens from violence based on what they look like, who they love, how they pray." The bill was added to a defense authorization bill. The bill was named in honor of Matthew Shepard and James Byrd.
There are already similar hate crime laws in place, however, this bill imposes much stronger federal enforcement. It grants greater power to federal prosecutors to prosecute hate crime laws by prosecuting those who have been found innocent by local or state courts to be prosecuted by the Federal Government. The bill also adds sexual orientation to federally protected groups.
Attorney General Eric Holder admitted that there is no equal protection under hate bill. Holder was asked by Senator Jeff Sessions (R-AL) if the would equally protect all Americans from violent crimes? Holder explicitly says the hate bill will not provide equal protection to most Americans. Holders says that the bill is to protect specific groups that have a history of being targeted by violence because of the color of their skin or sexual orientation.
The bill is unconstitutional because it violates the 10th Amendment by granting the Federal Government authority over local and state government in prosecuting hate crimes. It violates the 14th Amendment by granting certain groups special protected status, as well the double jeopardy clause of the 5th amendment. This Bill does not provide equal protection to all Americans and is therefore unconstitutional. It grants special rights to certain groups while making the rest of us 2nd class citizens.
Comments
How could he screw something up so badly ? Doesn't he have access to any lawyers ? I thought he taught constitutional law or something like that. Cowabunga ! What a mess.
This is just one more way to circumvent the Constitution's double-jeopardy prohibition. Even before this bill goes into effect, courts routinely violate the spirit of double jeopardy prohibition, if not the actual letter of the law, by trying people for civil charges after acquittal for the same offense in criminal court. This new law just adds an additional mechanism to re-try someone accused of a crime, after they've already been acquitted.
Maybe Congress should just formally repeal any of the amendments in the Bill of Rights that it doesn't like. (They've essentially repealed the 4th Amendment already).
Just make sure that if you're going to commit a crime, don't be thinking "unapproved" thoughts while you do it.
What is essential is that we follow a higher law of love. This will in fact serve everybody and overstep every way in which are constitution is faulty. The act of the Law which is fulfilled by Love not the binding force of law can save a nation.
Stark
You are not a civil libertarian. You don't believe in constitutional rights. You are not opposed to hate crime laws because you want to protect individual rights. You are against hate crime laws because you are a racist homophobe.
The Sheppard/Byrd hate crime act that our President signed into law is perfectly constitutional. You object to it with your made-up constitutional objections because you are too much of a wussie to tell your readers that you are a nazi.
who cares. just live life in the moment. love love theres not enough time to hate, so learn to love and be happy. sighning it unconstitutional who knows if ne thing will get better or worse who ever know. people who care about stuff like this are the people who carry to much hate in their lives. no one will ever know if something will get better or worse so who cares about politics and govt. i dont im just looking for a current event in my us govt class.
peace.
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!