Are 'Hate Crimes' in violation the 14th amendment?

Similar Questions: 'Hate Crimes' violation 14th amendment Recent Questions About: 'Hate Crimes' violation 14th amendment.

Let's see what it actually says about hate. "Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. Section 2. Representatives shall be apportioned among the several States according to their respective numbers, counting the whole number of persons in each State, excluding Indians not taxed.

But when the right to vote at any election for the choice of electors for President and Vice President of the United States, Representatives in Congress, the Executive and Judicial officers of a State, or the members of the Legislature thereof, is denied to any of the male inhabitants of such State, being twenty-one years of age, and citizens of the United States, or in any way abridged, except for participation in rebellion, or other crime, the basis of representation therein shall be reduced in the proportion which the number of such male citizens shall bear to the whole number of male citizens twenty-one years of age in such State. Section 3. No person shall be a Senator or Representative in Congress, or elector of President and Vice President, or hold any office, civil or military, under the United States, or under any State, who, having previously taken an oath, as a member of Congress, or as an officer of the United States, or as a member of any State legislature, or as an executive or judicial officer of any State, to support the Constitution of the United States, shall have engaged in insurrection or rebellion against the same, or given aid or comfort to the enemies thereof.

But Congress may, by a vote of two-thirds of each House, remove such disability. Section 4. The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned.

But neither the United States nor any State shall assume or pay any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States, or any claim for the loss or emancipation of any slave; but all such debts, obligations and claims shall be held illegal and void. Section 5. The Congress shall have power to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.

" Nothing in there about hate. Thus, the question devolves to what kind of law is made concerning hate and whether it violates this Amendment. However, most hate crimes seek to penalize (prevent?

) people from "depriving any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law. " Where this is irrelevant is that is directed towards the four levels of government in this country, not individual citizens. However, if "due process of law" works up a special crime for your particular actions, then as long as you have enjoyed all of that due process, maybe your hate could still be punished?

Sources: But how does one prosecute "hate"? .

1 Protects rights against state infringements, defines citizenship, prohibits states from interfering with privileges and immunities, requires due process and equal protection, punishes states for denying vote, and disqualifies Confederate officials and debts. Here is a summary of the 14th. What do you think?

This user has been banned from Askville.

1 Protects rights against state infringements, defines citizenship, prohibits states from interfering with privileges and immunities, requires due process and equal protection, punishes states for denying vote, and disqualifies Confederate officials and debts. Here is a summary of the 14th. What do you think?

.

Protects rights against state infringements, defines citizenship, prohibits states from interfering with privileges and immunities, requires due process and equal protection, punishes states for denying vote, and disqualifies Confederate officials and debts. Here is a summary of the 14th. What do you think?

Lychnobite replied to post #1: 2 requires due process and equal protection>>equal protection isn't the same as equal punishment I suppose. Why wouldn't this apply to the state that tries two people for murders with identical situations only attempts to increase the severity of his sentence for the victim who was gay or black or transgendered or (insert victim group here) This user has been banned from Askville.

Lychnobite replied to post #1: 2 requires due process and equal protection>>equal protection isn't the same as equal punishment I suppose. Why wouldn't this apply to the state that tries two people for murders with identical situations only attempts to increase the severity of his sentence for the victim who was gay or black or transgendered or (insert victim group here) .

Requires due process and equal protection>>equal protection isn't the same as equal punishment I suppose. Why wouldn't this apply to the state that tries two people for murders with identical situations only attempts to increase the severity of his sentence for the victim who was gay or black or transgendered or (insert victim group here).

3 I think the main reason hate crimes laws exist is because in many small towns, there would be some "local boys" who would brutally beat or harass someone of a certain race or sexual persuasion. When they would go before the court, they'd get a slap on the wrist -- the lightest sentence you could get for assault or battery. Sometimes, it was because the local judge didn't really like those brown skinned or gay people in town either.

These laws were originally made so that local courts couldn't turn a blind eye to racial violence, as they have so many times in the past.

I think the main reason hate crimes laws exist is because in many small towns, there would be some "local boys" who would brutally beat or harass someone of a certain race or sexual persuasion. When they would go before the court, they'd get a slap on the wrist -- the lightest sentence you could get for assault or battery. Sometimes, it was because the local judge didn't really like those brown skinned or gay people in town either.

These laws were originally made so that local courts couldn't turn a blind eye to racial violence, as they have so many times in the past.

Lychnobite replied to post #3: 4 These laws were originally made so that local courts couldn't turn a blind eye to racial violence, as they have so many times in the past. >>Is'nt that in the eye of the beholder? Racial violence exists because the govt.

Forces confrontational situations e.g. Desegregation , imho, so it's probably the local law turning a blind eye to crimes that seemed inevitable, or maybe even preventable had the victim not been there in the first place, out of protest to federal laws imposing where local law should should suffice. What I see 'hate crimes' do is abuse the justice system to advance the goals of one interest group over the other. This user has been banned from Askville.

Lychnobite replied to post #3: 4 These laws were originally made so that local courts couldn't turn a blind eye to racial violence, as they have so many times in the past. >>Is'nt that in the eye of the beholder? Racial violence exists because the govt.

Forces confrontational situations e.g. Desegregation , imho, so it's probably the local law turning a blind eye to crimes that seemed inevitable, or maybe even preventable had the victim not been there in the first place, out of protest to federal laws imposing where local law should should suffice. What I see 'hate crimes' do is abuse the justice system to advance the goals of one interest group over the other.

These laws were originally made so that local courts couldn't turn a blind eye to racial violence, as they have so many times in the past. >>Is'nt that in the eye of the beholder? Racial violence exists because the govt.

Forces confrontational situations e.g. Desegregation , imho, so it's probably the local law turning a blind eye to crimes that seemed inevitable, or maybe even preventable had the victim not been there in the first place, out of protest to federal laws imposing where local law should should suffice. What I see 'hate crimes' do is abuse the justice system to advance the goals of one interest group over the other.

" "name the only amendment that has been repealed" "Remove your your burqa or go to prison and pay a fine. Is this proposed law anti-Muslim? A violation of civil rights?

" "First Amendment Right or Beyond the Pale? " "What does the Second Amendment really mean? " "How has the court interpreted the 14th amendment to apply the BIll of Rights to the states?

Name the only amendment that has been repealed.

Remove your your burqa or go to prison and pay a fine. Is this proposed law anti-Muslim? A violation of civil rights?

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.