Report text available as:

  • TXT
  • PDF   (PDF provides a complete and accurate display of this text.) Tip ?

111th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 1st Session                                                     111-86

======================================================================



 
        LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT HATE CRIMES PREVENTION ACT OF 2009

                                _______
                                

 April 27, 2009.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

    Mr. Conyers, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the 
                               following

                              R E P O R T

                             together with

                            DISSENTING VIEWS

                        [To accompany H.R. 1913]

      [Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]

  The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the bill 
(H.R. 1913) to provide Federal assistance to States, local 
jurisdictions, and Indian tribes to prosecute hate crimes, and 
for other purposes, having considered the same, reports 
favorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the 
bill as amended do pass.

                                CONTENTS

                                                                   Page
The Amendment....................................................     2
Purpose and Summary..............................................     4
Background and Need for the Legislation..........................     5
Hearings.........................................................    17
Committee Consideration..........................................    18
Committee Votes..................................................    18
Committee Oversight Findings.....................................    31
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures........................    31
Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate........................    32
Performance Goals and Objectives.................................    34
Constitutional Authority Statement...............................    34
Advisory on Earmarks.............................................    34
Section-by-Section Analysis......................................    34
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported............    35
Dissenting Views.................................................    38

                             The Amendment

  The amendment is as follows:
  Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the 
following:

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes 
Prevention Act of 2009''.

SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF HATE CRIME.

    In this Act--
            (1) the term ``crime of violence'' has the meaning given 
        that term in section 16, title 18, United States Code;
            (2) the term ``hate crime'' has the meaning given such term 
        in section 280003(a) of the Violent Crime Control and Law 
        Enforcement Act of 1994 (28 U.S.C. 994 note); and
            (3) the term ``local'' means a county, city, town, 
        township, parish, village, or other general purpose political 
        subdivision of a State.

SEC. 3. SUPPORT FOR CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS AND PROSECUTIONS BY STATE, 
                    LOCAL, AND TRIBAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICIALS.

    (a) Assistance Other Than Financial Assistance.--
            (1) In general.--At the request of a State, local, or 
        Tribal law enforcement agency, the Attorney General may provide 
        technical, forensic, prosecutorial, or any other form of 
        assistance in the criminal investigation or prosecution of any 
        crime that--
                    (A) constitutes a crime of violence;
                    (B) constitutes a felony under the State, local, or 
                Tribal laws; and
                    (C) is motivated by prejudice based on the actual 
                or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, 
                gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or 
                disability of the victim, or is a violation of the 
                State, local, or Tribal hate crime laws.
            (2) Priority.--In providing assistance under paragraph (1), 
        the Attorney General shall give priority to crimes committed by 
        offenders who have committed crimes in more than one State and 
        to rural jurisdictions that have difficulty covering the 
        extraordinary expenses relating to the investigation or 
        prosecution of the crime.
    (b) Grants.--
            (1) In general.--The Attorney General may award grants to 
        State, local, and Indian law enforcement agencies for 
        extraordinary expenses associated with the investigation and 
        prosecution of hate crimes.
            (2) Office of justice programs.--In implementing the grant 
        program under this subsection, the Office of Justice Programs 
        shall work closely with grantees to ensure that the concerns 
        and needs of all affected parties, including community groups 
        and schools, colleges, and universities, are addressed through 
        the local infrastructure developed under the grants.
            (3) Application.--
                    (A) In general.--Each State, local, and Indian law 
                enforcement agency that desires a grant under this 
                subsection shall submit an application to the Attorney 
                General at such time, in such manner, and accompanied 
                by or containing such information as the Attorney 
                General shall reasonably require.
                    (B) Date for submission.--Applications submitted 
                pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be submitted during 
                the 60-day period beginning on a date that the Attorney 
                General shall prescribe.
                    (C) Requirements.--A State, local, and Indian law 
                enforcement agency applying for a grant under this 
                subsection shall--
                            (i) describe the extraordinary purposes for 
                        which the grant is needed;
                            (ii) certify that the State, local 
                        government, or Indian tribe lacks the resources 
                        necessary to investigate or prosecute the hate 
                        crime;
                            (iii) demonstrate that, in developing a 
                        plan to implement the grant, the State, local, 
                        and Indian law enforcement agency has consulted 
                        and coordinated with nonprofit, nongovernmental 
                        violence recovery service programs that have 
                        experience in providing services to victims of 
                        hate crimes; and
                            (iv) certify that any Federal funds 
                        received under this subsection will be used to 
                        supplement, not supplant, non-Federal funds 
                        that would otherwise be available for 
                        activities funded under this subsection.
            (4) Deadline.--An application for a grant under this 
        subsection shall be approved or denied by the Attorney General 
        not later than 30 business days after the date on which the 
        Attorney General receives the application.
            (5) Grant amount.--A grant under this subsection shall not 
        exceed $100,000 for any single jurisdiction in any 1-year 
        period.
            (6) Report.--Not later than December 31, 2011, the Attorney 
        General shall submit to Congress a report describing the 
        applications submitted for grants under this subsection, the 
        award of such grants, and the purposes for which the grant 
        amounts were expended.
            (7) Authorization of appropriations.--There is authorized 
        to be appropriated to carry out this subsection $5,000,000 for 
        each of fiscal years 2010 and 2011.

SEC. 4. GRANT PROGRAM.

    (a) Authority To Award Grants.--The Office of Justice Programs of 
the Department of Justice may award grants, in accordance with such 
regulations as the Attorney General may prescribe, to State, local, or 
Tribal programs designed to combat hate crimes committed by juveniles, 
including programs to train local law enforcement officers in 
identifying, investigating, prosecuting, and preventing hate crimes.
    (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are authorized to be 
appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section.

SEC. 5. AUTHORIZATION FOR ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL TO ASSIST STATE, LOCAL, 
                    AND TRIBAL LAW ENFORCEMENT.

    There are authorized to be appropriated to the Department of 
Justice, including the Community Relations Service, for fiscal years 
2010, 2011, and 2012, such sums as are necessary to increase the number 
of personnel to prevent and respond to alleged violations of section 
249 of title 18, United States Code, as added by section 7 of this Act.

SEC. 6. PROHIBITION OF CERTAIN HATE CRIME ACTS.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 13 of title 18, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:

``Sec. 249. Hate crime acts

    ``(a) In General.--
            ``(1) Offenses involving actual or perceived race, color, 
        religion, or national origin.--Whoever, whether or not acting 
        under color of law, willfully causes bodily injury to any 
        person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive 
        or incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily injury to any 
        person, because of the actual or perceived race, color, 
        religion, or national origin of any person--
                    ``(A) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 years, 
                fined in accordance with this title, or both; and
                    ``(B) shall be imprisoned for any term of years or 
                for life, fined in accordance with this title, or both, 
                if--
                            ``(i) death results from the offense; or
                            ``(ii) the offense includes kidnaping or an 
                        attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or 
                        an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, 
                        or an attempt to kill.
            ``(2) Offenses involving actual or perceived religion, 
        national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, 
        or disability.--
                    ``(A) In general.--Whoever, whether or not acting 
                under color of law, in any circumstance described in 
                subparagraph (B), willfully causes bodily injury to any 
                person or, through the use of fire, a firearm, or an 
                explosive or incendiary device, attempts to cause 
                bodily injury to any person, because of the actual or 
                perceived religion, national origin, gender, sexual 
                orientation, gender identity, or disability of any 
                person--
                            ``(i) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 
                        years, fined in accordance with this title, or 
                        both; and
                            ``(ii) shall be imprisoned for any term of 
                        years or for life, fined in accordance with 
                        this title, or both, if--
                                    ``(I) death results from the 
                                offense; or
                                    ``(II) the offense includes 
                                kidnaping or an attempt to kidnap, 
                                aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt 
                                to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or 
                                an attempt to kill.
                    ``(B) Circumstances described.--For purposes of 
                subparagraph (A), the circumstances described in this 
                subparagraph are that--
                            ``(i) the conduct described in subparagraph 
                        (A) occurs during the course of, or as the 
                        result of, the travel of the defendant or the 
                        victim--
                                    ``(I) across a State line or 
                                national border; or
                                    ``(II) using a channel, facility, 
                                or instrumentality of interstate or 
                                foreign commerce;
                            ``(ii) the defendant uses a channel, 
                        facility, or instrumentality of interstate or 
                        foreign commerce in connection with the conduct 
                        described in subparagraph (A);
                            ``(iii) in connection with the conduct 
                        described in subparagraph (A), the defendant 
                        employs a firearm, explosive or incendiary 
                        device, or other weapon that has traveled in 
                        interstate or foreign commerce; or
                            ``(iv) the conduct described in 
                        subparagraph (A)--
                                    ``(I) interferes with commercial or 
                                other economic activity in which the 
                                victim is engaged at the time of the 
                                conduct; or
                                    ``(II) otherwise affects interstate 
                                or foreign commerce.
    ``(b) Certification Requirement.--No prosecution of any offense 
described in this subsection may be undertaken by the United States, 
except under the certification in writing of the Attorney General, the 
Deputy Attorney General, the Associate Attorney General, or any 
Assistant Attorney General specially designated by the Attorney General 
that--
            ``(1) such certifying individual has reasonable cause to 
        believe that the actual or perceived race, color, religion, 
        national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, 
        or disability of any person was a motivating factor underlying 
        the alleged conduct of the defendant; and
            ``(2) such certifying individual has consulted with State 
        or local law enforcement officials regarding the prosecution 
        and determined that--
                    ``(A) the State does not have jurisdiction or does 
                not intend to exercise jurisdiction;
                    ``(B) the State has requested that the Federal 
                Government assume jurisdiction;
                    ``(C) the State does not object to the Federal 
                Government assuming jurisdiction; or
                    ``(D) the verdict or sentence obtained pursuant to 
                State charges left demonstratively unvindicated the 
                Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated 
                violence.
    ``(c) Definitions.--
            ``(1) In this section--
                    ``(A) the term `explosive or incendiary device' has 
                the meaning given such term in section 232 of this 
                title; and
                    ``(B) the term `firearm' has the meaning given such 
                term in section 921(a) of this title.
            ``(2) For the purposes of this chapter, the term `gender 
        identity' means actual or perceived gender-related 
        characteristics.
    ``(d) Rule of Evidence.--In a prosecution for an offense under this 
section, evidence of expression or associations of the defendant may 
not be introduced as substantive evidence at trial, unless the evidence 
specifically relates to that offense. However, nothing in this section 
affects the rules of evidence governing impeachment of a witness.''.
    (b) Technical and Conforming Amendment.--The table of sections at 
the beginning of chapter 13 of title 18, United States Code, is amended 
by adding at the end the following new item:

``249. Hate crime acts.''.

SEC. 7. SEVERABILITY.

    If any provision of this Act, an amendment made by this Act, or the 
application of such provision or amendment to any person or 
circumstance is held to be unconstitutional, the remainder of this Act, 
the amendments made by this Act, and the application of the provisions 
of such to any person or circumstance shall not be affected thereby.

SEC. 8. RULE OF CONSTRUCTION.

    Nothing in this Act, or the amendments made by this Act, shall be 
construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected from legal 
prohibition by, or any activities protected by the Constitution.

                          Purpose and Summary

    H.R. 1913 would provide assistance to State and local law 
enforcement in the investigation and prosecution of hate 
crimes, and would amend chapter 13 of title 18, United States 
Code, to make certain assaults against persons of defined 
groups a crime.

                Background and Need for the Legislation

                                OVERVIEW

    Bias crimes are disturbingly prevalent and pose a 
significant threat to the full participation of all Americans 
in our democratic society. Hate crimes involve the purposeful 
selection of victims for violence and intimidation based on 
their perceived attributes; they are a violent and dangerous 
manifestation of prejudice against identifiable groups.
    As with most criminal activity, violent hate crimes can 
properly be investigated and prosecuted at both the Federal and 
State/local level, depending on the facts of the case and the 
needs of the investigation. The FBI has the most complete data, 
through voluntary reporting from law enforcement agencies 
around the country. But it is believed that violent hate crimes 
are significantly under-reported.
    Since 1991, the FBI has identified over 118,000 reported 
violent hate crimes. For the year 2007, the most current data 
available, the FBI documented 7,624 hate crimes.\1\ Racially-
motivated bias accounted for approximately half (50.8%) of all 
incidents, religious bias accounted for 1,400 incidents 
(18.4%), sexual orientation bias for 1,265 incidents (16.6%), 
and ethnicity/national origin bias for 1,007 incidents (13.2%).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\See U.S. Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of 
Investigations, 2007 Hate Crimes Statistics, available at www.fbi.gov/
ucr/hc2007/incidents.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act is 
intended to address two serious limitations in the reach of the 
current Federal hate crimes statutes--principally, 18 U.S.C. 
Sec. 245 (Interference with Federally Protected Activities) and 
42 U.S.C. Sec. 3631 (Interference with Housing). Enacted in 
1968, these statutes prohibit violent hate crimes in a limited 
set of contexts, based on animus against the victim's race, 
color, religion, or national origin.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\42 U.S.C. Sec. 3631 also punishes violent intimidation with 
housing activities when the victims are selected based on sex, 
handicap, and familial status.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    There are two deficiencies in these statutes: First, the 
statutes are confined to hate-motivated violence in connection 
with the victim's participation in one of six narrowly defined 
``federally protected activities'' (under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 245) 
or in connection with housing (under 42 U.S.C. Sec. 3631). 
Second, they provide little or no coverage whatsoever for 
violent hate crimes committed because of the victim's perceived 
sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability. 
These deficiencies limit the Federal Government's ability to 
prosecute certain hate crimes, and its ability to assist State 
and local law enforcement agencies in the investigation and 
prosecution of many of the most heinous hate crimes.
    The bill amends the Criminal Civil Rights Chapter (Chapter 
13) of title 18 of the United States Code by creating a new 
section 249 to address the limited reach of existing law. 
Section 249 establishes two criminal prohibitions. In cases 
involving violence because of the victim's race, color, 
religion, or national origin, section 249(a)(1) prohibits the 
intentional infliction of bodily injury (or certain attempts) 
without regard to the victim's participation in specific 
enumerated activities. In cases involving certain violent 
crimes motivated by hatred based on the victim's actual or 
perceived sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or 
disability, the new section 249(a)(2) prohibits the intentional 
infliction of bodily injury when the incident has a nexus, as 
defined in the bill, to interstate commerce.\3\ By expanding 
the reach of the Federal criminal laws to address both sets of 
limitations, section 249 provides the Federal Government the 
tools to effectively pursue the significant Federal interest in 
eradicating bias-motivated violence--both by assisting States 
and local law enforcement, and by pursuing Federal charges 
where appropriate.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \3\The approach taken in this legislation is similar to that taken 
in the Church Arson Prevention Act of 1996, which also amended Chapter 
13 of Title 18. See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 247.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It is important to emphasize that State and local 
authorities currently investigate and prosecute the 
overwhelming majority of hate crimes, and are fully expected to 
continue to do so under this legislation.\4\ Concurrent Federal 
jurisdiction enables not only the devotion of Federal resources 
to assist State and local law enforcement in the investigation 
and prosecution of hate crimes, but also, in limited 
circumstances, to bring Federal criminal enforcement resources 
to bear as a ``backstop'' to State and local efforts. Such a 
backstop is important, for example, where the State does not 
have an appropriate statute, or otherwise declines to 
investigate or prosecute; where the State requests that the 
Federal Government assume jurisdiction; or where actions by 
State and local law enforcement officials leave demonstratively 
unvindicated the Federal interest in eradicating bias-motivated 
violence.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \4\From 1991-2005, the FBI has received reports of almost 114,000 
hate crimes. During that period, however, the Department of Justice has 
brought fewer than 100 Federal cases under 18 U.S.C. Sec. 245. For more 
information see http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2005/index.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

 CURRENT LAW AND THE NEED FOR EXPANDED JURISDICTION TO FULFILL FEDERAL 
       RESPONSIBILITIES OF SUPPORT, COOPERATION, AND BACKSTOPPING

    Section 245(b) of title 18 has been the principal Federal 
hate crimes statute since its enactment in 1968. This section 
prohibits the use of force, or threat of force, to injure, 
intimidate, or interfere with (or to attempt to injure, 
intimidate, or interfere with) ``any person because of his 
race, color, religion or national origin'' with the intent to 
interfere with his or her participation in any of six 
specifically enumerated ``federally protected activities.''\5\ 
Thus, to prove a violation of section 245(b), the Government 
must prove beyond a reasonable doubt two intents on the part of 
the accused: first, that the crime of violence was motivated by 
racial, ethnic, or religious hatred; and second, that it was 
committed with the intent to interfere with the victim's 
participation in one or more of the federally protected 
activities. Even in the most blatant cases of racial, ethnic, 
or religious violence, an accused has committed no Federal 
crime in violation of section 245(b) unless he is proved to 
have possessed both these intents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \5\The six enumerated ``federally protected activities'' are: ``(A) 
enrolling in or attending any public school or public college; (B) 
participating in or enjoying any benefit, service, privilege, program, 
facility or activity provided or administered by any State or 
subdivision thereof; (C) applying for or enjoying employment, ***; (D) 
serving *** as grand or petit juror; E) traveling in or using any 
facility of interstate commerce, ***; (F) enjoying the goods [or] 
services [of certain places of public accommodation].'' 18 U.S.C. 
Sec. 245(b)(2).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The limited reach of section 245(b), cabined in particular 
by the ``federally protected activity'' requirement, has 
limited the ability of Federal law enforcement officials to 
work with State and local officials in the investigation and 
prosecution of many incidents of brutality and violence 
motivated by prejudice. Moreover, this intent requirement has 
led to acquittals in several of the cases in which the 
Department of Justice has assumed Federal jurisdiction and 
brought prosecutions under Sec. 245(b)--even where the proof of 
racially motivated violence was not in doubt. Expanding the 
circumstances under which certain hate crimes can be prosecuted 
by removing the ``federally protected activity'' requirement, 
and permitting prosecution for bias-motivated crimes of 
violence that cause bodily injury (or a class of specified 
attempts) based on the victim's race, color, religion, or 
national origin, will thus (1) permit the Federal Government to 
provide assistance to State law enforcement in a wider range of 
circumstances, and (2) criminalize instances of vicious bias-
motived crimes that presently fall outside the reaches of the 
Federal criminal laws.
Permitting the Federal Government to Assist State and Local Law 
        Enforcement
    Where Federal jurisdiction has existed in the limited 
circumstances covered by 18 U.S.C. 245(b), the Federal 
Government's resources, forensic expertise, and experience in 
the identification and proof of bias-motivated violence and 
criminal networks has provided an invaluable investigative 
complement to local investigators' familiarity with the local 
community. Through their cooperation, State and Federal law 
enforcement officials have brought a number of perpetrators of 
hate crimes to justice.
    The investigation conducted into the death of James Byrd in 
Jasper County, Texas, is an excellent example of the benefits 
of an effective Federal/State investigative partnership in a 
high-profile hate crime case. Mr. Byrd was selected to be 
tortured and killed solely because of his race. From the time 
of the first reports of Mr. Byrd's death, the FBI collaborated 
with local officials in an investigation that led to the prompt 
arrest and indictment of three men on State capital murder 
charges. The resources, forensic expertise, and civil rights 
experience of the FBI and the Department of Justice provided 
valuable assistance to local law enforcement officials. The 
fact that the crime at issue appeared to violate established 
Federal criminal civil rights law was critical in the FBI's 
determination of its legal authority to lend assistance to the 
State prosecution.
    It is also useful to consider the work in the mid-1990's of 
the National Church Arson Task Force, which investigated and 
prosecuted violations of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 247. Section 247, which 
was enacted in 1988 and amended in the mid-1990's, does not 
have limitations analogous to the ``federally protected 
activity'' requirement of 18 U.S.C. Sec. 245(b)(2). Created to 
address a rash of church fires across the country, the Task 
Force's Federal prosecutors and investigators from the Bureau 
of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms and the FBI collaborated with 
State and local officials in the investigation of every church 
arson that had occurred since January 1, 1995. The results of 
these State/federal partnerships were extraordinary: 34% of the 
joint investigations conducted during the 2-year life of the 
Task Force resulted in arrests on State or Federal charges,\6\ 
more than double the 16% national arrest rate in arson cases 
generally (most of which are investigated without Federal 
assistance). More than 80% of the suspects arrested in joint 
investigations during the life of the Task Force were 
prosecuted in State courts under State laws.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \6\See Statement of Eric H. Holder, Jr., Deputy Attorney General, 
U.S. Department of Justice, May 11, 1999, available at www.usdoj.gov/
archive/dag/testimony/daghate051199.htm.
    \7\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    By expanding the reach of Federal criminal law, this bill 
will similarly expand the ability of the FBI and other Federal 
law enforcement entities to provide assistance to State law 
enforcement authorities. It is expected that this cooperation 
will result in an increase in the number of hate crimes solved 
by arrests and successful prosecutions, in the same way that 
the devotion of Federal law enforcement resources increased the 
number of arrests and prosecutions in the church arson context. 
And as with church arson, it is expected that a large majority 
of hate crimes prosecutions will continue to be brought in 
State court, under State law.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \8\Hate Crimes Violence, Hearings Before the House Comm. on the 
Judiciary, 106th Congress 13, 17-18 (1999) (Testimony of Eric Holder, 
Deputy Attorney General).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ensuring that Important Federal Civil Rights Interests are Vindicated
    H.R. 1913 will enable the Federal Government to prosecute 
hate crimes where there is a significant Federal interest that 
is not otherwise being addressed. Where State and local 
prosecutors fail to bring appropriate State charges, or where 
State laws or State prosecutions are inadequate to vindicate 
the Federal interest, it is imperative that the Federal 
Government be able to step in and bring effective Federal 
prosecutions to ``backstop'' State and local law enforcement.
    Juror accounts in several Federal hate crimes prosecutions 
resulting in acquittal suggest that the double intent 
requirement in section 245(b)(2), particularly the ``intent to 
interfere with the specified federally protected activity,'' 
has frustrated the aims of justice. In testimony before this 
Committee, former Deputy Attorney General Eric Holder discussed 
a case in Texas in which the jury acquitted three white 
supremacists of Federal criminal civil rights charges arising 
from unprovoked assaults upon African-Americans, including one 
incident in which the defendants knocked a man unconscious as 
he stood near a bus stop.\9\ Some of the jurors revealed after 
the trial that although the assaults were clearly motivated by 
racial animus, there was no apparent intent to deprive the 
victims of the right to participate in any ``federally 
protected activity.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \9\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Another section 245(b)(2) case that ended in acquittal 
involved the prosecution of a notorious serial murderer and 
white supremacist for shooting then-Urban League President 
Vernon Jordan as he walked from a car toward his motel room (a 
place of ``public accommodation'') in Fort Wayne, Indiana. 
Following an acquittal, several jurors advised the press that 
although they were persuaded that the defendant committed the 
shooting because of Mr. Jordan's race, they did not believe 
that the shooting was intended to interfere with Mr. Jordan's 
use of the hotel facilities. The shooter later admitted that he 
targeted Mr. Jordan as part of a crusade to eradicate Blacks, 
Jews, and ``race-mixers.''\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \10\Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    In each of these examples, one or more persons committed a 
heinous act of violence clearly motivated by the race, color, 
religion, or national origin of the victim. In each instance, 
local prosecutors failed to bring State criminal charges. Yet 
in each case, the double intent requirement prevented the 
Department of Justice from vindicating the Federal interest in 
the punishment and deterrence of hate-based violence.
    The current Federal hate crimes statute turns on such 
arbitrary distinctions as whether a racially motivated assault 
occurs on a public sidewalk as opposed to a private parking lot 
across the street, or whether a convenience store where such an 
assault occurs has a video game inside that might qualify the 
store as a ``place of entertainment.'' The Federal Government's 
authority to participate in State-Federal investigative 
partnerships, or to step in and play a backstop role when 
necessary, should not hinge upon such unnecessary, 
anachronistic distinctions. And with the addition of section 
249(a)(1) by this legislation this will no longer be the case.

           HATE CRIMES BASED ON SEXUAL ORIENTATION, GENDER, 
                     GENDER IDENTITY, OR DISABILITY

    Law enforcement authorities and civic leaders have learned 
that a failure to address the problem of hate crimes can cause 
a seemingly isolated incident to fester into wide-spread 
tension that can damage the social fabric of the community at 
large. The Supreme Court recognized this important factual 
distinction in Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476, 487 (1993) 
as meriting the designation of a hate crime as a specific 
offense: ``it is but reasonable that among crimes of different 
natures those should be most severely punished, which are the 
most destructive of the public safety and happiness.''\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \11\Quoting 4 W. Blackstone, Commentaries.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The existing Federal hate crimes laws do not cover hate 
crimes committed because of bias based on the victim's actual 
or perceived sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or 
disability. There is an emerging consensus, however, that hate 
crimes motivated by such biases are equally deserving of 
prosecution.
    Notably, in 1994, Congress passed legislation directing the 
United States Sentencing Commission to promulgate a sentencing 
enhancement for crimes committed on account of the victim's 
actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender, or 
disability.\12\ Further, since 1994, gender identity has been 
added to numerous State and local hate crimes statutes based on 
the same understanding of the corrosive effects of bias-
motivated violence, and in recognition of the the fact that 
this particular bias has been behind particularly violent 
assaults.\13\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \12\The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, Pub. 
L. No. 103-322, Sec. 280003a, provides:

      DIRECTION TO UNITED STATES SENTENCING COMMISSION REGARDING 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      SENTENCING ENHANCEMENTS FOR HATE CRIMES.

      (a) DEFINITION.--In this section, ``hate crime'' means a 
      crime in which the defendant intentionally selects a 
      victim, or in the case of a property crime, the property 
      that is the object of the crime, because of the actual or 
      perceived race, color, religion, national origin, 
      ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation of any 
      person.

      (b) SENTENCING ENHANCEMENT.--Pursuant to section 994 of 
      title 28, United States Code, the United States Sentencing 
      Commission shall promulgate guidelines or amend existing 
      guidelines to provide sentencing enhancements of not less 
      than 3 offense levels for offenses that the finder of fact 
      at trial determines beyond a reasonable doubt are hate 
      crimes. ***.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \13\See, Hate Crime Laws, Transgender Law & Policy Institute, 
www.transgenderlaw.org/hatecrimelaws/index.htm (State survey of legal 
policy).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The following facts support an extension of Federal 
jurisdiction to cover bias crimes committed on the basis of 
these prejudices.
Sexual Orientation
    Statistics gathered by the Federal Government and private 
organizations indicate that a significant number of hate crimes 
based on the sexual orientation of the victim are committed 
every year in the United States. According to 2007 FBI 
statistics, hate crimes based on the victim's sexual 
orientation--gay, lesbian, or bisexual--constituted the third 
highest category reported--1,265 incidents, or one-sixth of all 
reported hate crimes.\14\ From 1991 through 2005, there were 
over 17,000 reported hate crimes based on sexual orientation. 
And as noted previously, this figure is likely to significantly 
understate the true number of these crimes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \14\Federal Bureau of Investigations, 2007 Hate Crimes Statistics.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Many victims of anti-lesbian and anti-gay violence do not 
report the crimes to local law enforcement officials. In fact, 
according to Austin, Texas Police Commander Gary Olfers, hate 
crimes are the ``number 1 under-reported crime in the state.'' 
And ``[d]espite underreporting, the trend in State statistics 
shows that gays and lesbians are increasingly the targets of 
crime.''\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \15\Dallas Morning News, Nov. 8, 1999 (``Hate-crimes experts say 
statistics don't tell story: Many cases unreported; special law rarely 
used'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Despite the prevalence of violent acts committed against 
persons because of their sexual orientation, such crimes are 
not covered by 18 U.S.C. Sec. 245 unless there happens to be 
some recognized basis for Federal jurisdiction, such as bias 
against a gay victim's race. Accordingly, the Federal 
Government has been without authority to work in partnership 
with local law enforcement officials, or to bring Federal 
prosecutions, when gay men or lesbians are the victims of 
murders or other violent assaults because of bias based on 
their sexual orientation.
    The murder of Matthew Shepard in Laramie, Wyoming, is a 
stark example of the limitations of Federal law. Despite the 
clear evidence that the murder of Mr. Shepard was motivated by 
animus based on his sexual orientation, the Federal Government 
lacked jurisdiction under existing hate crimes law either to 
investigate this horrifying crime in partnership with State and 
local officials or, if necessary, to bring Federal hate crimes 
charges. As a result, according to Commander David O'Malley--
the chief investigator in the Shepard murder case--``the Albany 
County Sheriff's office had to furlough five investigators 
because of soaring costs'' associated with handling the case 
without any financial or investigatory support from the Federal 
Government.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \16\Excerpts of press statement by Commander David O'Malley, 
September 12, 2000. In a November 11, 1999, letter to Speaker Dennis 
Hastert, Sheriff James Pond and detective Sergeant Robert DeBree of the 
Albany County Sheriff's Department wrote: ``We believe justice was 
served in this case [Shepard], but not without cost. We have been 
devastated financially, due to expenses incurred in bringing Matthew's 
killers to justice. For example, we had to lay off five law enforcement 
staff.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The situation confronting the Albany County Sheriff's 
office in the Shepard case stands in marked contrast to what 
occurred in the above discussed Jasper, Texas case. Because the 
murder of James Byrd, Jr. was covered under the existing 
Federal hate crimes statutes, the local law enforcement agency 
in Jasper received forensic assistance and nearly $300,000 from 
the Federal Government to help cover the costs associated with 
successfully prosecuting Mr. Byrd's killers.
Gender
    Although acts of violence committed against women 
traditionally have been viewed as ``personal attacks'' rather 
than as hate crimes, a significant number of women are exposed 
to terror, brutality, serious injury, and even death because of 
their gender. Indeed, Congress, through the enactment and 
reauthorization of the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA), 
recognized that some violent assaults committed against women 
are bias crimes rather than mere ``random'' attacks.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \17\Sen. Rep. No. 103-138 (1993) (testimony of Prof. Burt 
Neuborne).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The majority of States do not have statutes that 
specifically prohibit gender-based hate crimes. Although all 50 
States have statutes prohibiting rape and other crimes 
typically committed against women, only 28, plus the District 
of Columbia, have hate crimes statutes that include gender 
among the categories of prohibited bias motives.\18\ The bill 
will harmonize Federal hate crimes law with the premise of 
VAWA, enabling Federal officials to work with State and local 
law enforcement officials in the investigation and prosecution 
of violent gender-based hate crimes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \18\See Anti-Defamation League, State Hate Crime Statutory 
Provisions, www.adl.org/99hatecrime/state_hate_crime_laws.pdf (State 
survey of hate crime laws).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    It is important to emphasize in this regard that the bill 
will not result in the federalization of all rapes, other 
sexual assaults, or acts of domestic violence. Rather, as 
discussed below in greater detail, the legislation has been 
drafted to ensure that the Federal Government's investigations 
and prosecutions of gender-based hate crimes will be strictly 
limited to those crimes that are motivated by gender-based 
animus, and thus implicate the greatest Federal interest.
Gender Identity
    Hate crimes against transgender people tend to be 
particularly violent, the product of extreme bias against 
gender nonconformity. While there are no federally compiled 
statistics, advocacy groups have reported that over 400 people 
have been murdered due to anti-transgender bias since 1999.\19\ 
In 2008 alone, there were 21 murders of transgender and gender 
non-conforming people.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \19\According to an estimate by the Human Rights Campaign, 
transgender Americans face a one-in-twelve chance of being murdered. 
Statistics from the Gay, Lesbian and Straight Education Network (GLSEN) 
show that in schools 14.2% of transgender students report being 
physically assaulted as a result of their gender expression, while 
30.4% experienced physical harassment. Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against 
Defamation, www.glaad.org/publications.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Compounding the other challenges with effectively 
prosecuting and deterring these crimes, transgender people 
frequently distrust local law enforcement authorities, and the 
police often lack training and familiarity with transgender 
people. This lack of understanding highlights the need for a 
Federal backstop for State and local authorities, particularly 
in cases where the local law enforcement authorities exhibit 
intolerance, or fail to investigate or prosecute.
    The murder of Brandon Teena, dramatized in the movie ``Boys 
Don't Cry,'' is illustrative of the plight of this community. 
Even in cases where the crime is reported, police response is 
often inadequate. Teena was raped, and later killed, after the 
discovery of his biological gender by two acquaintances. He had 
reported his rape and beating, but the Richardson County, 
Nebraska Sheriff (who referred to Teena as ``it'') would not 
allow an arrest. Five days later, Teena was stabbed and beaten 
to death by the same perpetrators. In the civil suit brought by 
Teena's family, the court found that the county was partially 
responsible for Teena's death, and characterized the sheriff's 
behavior as ``extreme and outrageous.''\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \20\Omaha World-Herald, April 21, 2001; Assoc. Press, Oct. 5, 2001; 
N.Y. Times, April 21, 2001; Chi. Trib., April 21, 2001.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Currently, 13 States include protections for transgender 
individuals in their hate crime laws.\21\ Additionally, 13 
States and 93 local jurisdictions do so in their anti-
discrimination laws.\22\ There has also been explicit coverage 
of gender identity in the policies of leading corporations, 
where they have concluded that certain human resources cases 
are not purely based on gender or sexual orientation.\23\ These 
policies have helped shape public discourse on addressing the 
rights of transgender people, along with the rights of lesbian, 
gay, and bisexual persons. According to a poll commissioned by 
the Human Rights Campaign Foundation in 2002, 68% of Americans 
believe that the Federal Government needs laws to protect 
against anti-transgender hate crimes.\24\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \21\See Hate Crime Laws, Transgender Law & Policy Institute. For 
the purposes of this legislation, Gender Identity is defined as 
``actual or perceived gender-related characteristics.'' See H.R. 1913 
Section 6(c). While some States have prosecuted Gender Identity hate 
crimes under their gender or sexual orientation jurisdiction, those 
definitions provide a somewhat inexact fit for the underlying bias 
reflected against transgender persons and necessitate a separate 
Federal classification.
    \22\See Hate Crime Laws, Transgender Law & Policy Institute.
    \23\This list includes 53 of the Fortune 500 including AT&T;, IBM 
and Toys 'R' Us.
    \24\See, www.genderadvocates.org/News/HRC%20Poll.html.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disability
    Congress has shown a consistent and durable commitment, 
over more than two decades, to the protection of persons with 
disabilities from discrimination based on their disabilities. 
Beginning with the 1988 amendments to the Fair Housing Act, and 
continuing with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, 
Congress has extended civil rights protections to persons with 
disabilities in many traditional civil rights contexts. 
Currently, 24 States plus the District of Columbia have hate 
crime statutes that reach crimes of violence motivated by 
animus based on the victim's disability.\25\ Concerned about 
the problem of disability-based hate crimes, Congress also 
amended the Hate Crimes Statistics Act in 1994 to require the 
FBI to collect information about such hate-based incidents from 
State and local law enforcement agencies.\26\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \25\See Anti-Defamation League, State hate Crime Statutory 
Provisions.
    \26\See 28 U.S.C. Sec. 534 note.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    H.R. 1913 would take the important step of making Federal 
hate crimes law consistent in this area with the Federal 
position taken in other areas of civil rights law, and 
harmonizing it with the hate crimes laws of most States.
The Propriety of the Particular Group Designations
    Throughout the course of debate on this legislation, 
opponents have suggested that the classifications of sexual 
orientation, gender, gender identity, and disability do not 
merit specific protection under Federal law, or do not share 
commonality with other protected classifications. Such 
suggestions, however, are inconsistent with the overwhelming 
preponderance of historical facts. As noted above, these 
classifications are linked by jurisprudence,\27\ and by their 
inclusion together in numerous State and Federal criminal and 
anti-discrimination law statutes.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \27\See, e.g., R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992); 
Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 47 (1993).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Opponents offered a series of amendments during markup of 
the bill that would have added coverage for a disparate 
collection of groups, ranging from seniors to veterans to U.S. 
citizens to everyone who had any characteristic whatsoever. No 
evidence was offered, however, to show any record of group-
based violence against these classifications, or even a widely 
held societal prejudice. Contrary to suggestions, it is not 
difficult to determine whether a particular group faces 
substantial societal prejudice that makes it appropriate to 
protect against the kinds of hate-based violent crimes covered 
by this bill.
    One test for manifestation of prejudice is captured by the 
widely recognized Allport Scale.\28\ As the logic of the test 
demonstrates, the classifications of sexual orientation, 
gender, gender identity, and disability share a common history 
of being targeted for hate-based violence, along with the 
classifications found in 18 U.S.C. 245. Indeed, the 
classifications offered by amendments are ones held in wide 
esteem; many already have privileged legal status, special 
protection under separate criminal statutes, or special 
economic recognition. These kinds of classifications clearly 
fall outside the scope of legislation that is focused on crimes 
of violence motivated by societal hate and prejudice.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \28\The measure was devised by psychologist Gordon Allport and has 
been cited widely by the Federal judiciary. See, e.g., City of 
Cleburne, Tex. v. Cleburne Living Center, 473 U.S. 432, 464 (1985) 
(Marshall, J. dissenting) (home for mentally ill); Castaneda v. 
Partida, 430 U.S. 482, 503 (1977) (Marshall, J. dissenting) (grand jury 
composition); Dukes v. Waitkevich 429 U.S. 932 (1976) (Marshall, J. 
dissenting) (effect of rape/miscegenation allegations); Frazier v. 
Heebe, 788 F.2d 1049, 1058 (5th Cir. 1986) (residence requirement for 
bar admission); Stevens v. Dobs, Inc., 483 F.2d 82 (4th Cir. 1973) 
(housing discrimination); U. S. ex rel. Haynes v. McKendrick, 481 F.2d 
152, 157 (2d Cir. 1973) (prejudice in jury selection); Miller v. U.S., 
320 F.2d 767, 772 (D.C. Cir. 1963) (inferences of guilt).

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Allport's Scale of Prejudice ranges from 1-5.

      Scale 1, Antilocution--Antilocution means a majority group 
      freely make jokes about a minority group. Speech is in 
      terms of negative stereotypes and negative images. This is 
      also called hate speech. It is commonly seen as harmless by 
      the majority. Antilocution itself may not be harmful, but 
      it sets the stage for more severe outlets for prejudice.

      Scale 2, Avoidance--People in a minority group are actively 
      avoided by members of the majority group. No direct harm 
      may be intended, but harm is done through isolation.

      Scale 3, Discrimination--Minority group is discriminated 
      against by denying them opportunities and services and so 
      putting prejudice into action. Behaviours have the specific 
      goal of harming the minority group by preventing them from 
      achieving goals, getting education or jobs, etc. The 
      majority group is actively trying to harm the minority 
      (e.g. Jim Crow laws).

      Scale 4, Physical Attack--The majority group vandalize 
      minority group things, they burn property and carry out 
      violent attacks on individuals or groups. Physical harm is 
      done to members of the minority group. Examples are 
      lynchings of blacks, pogroms against Jews in Europe, 
      tarring and feathering Mormons in 1800's and British 
      Loyalists in the 1700's.

      Scale 5, Extermination--The majority group seeks 
      extermination of the minority group. They attempt to 
      eliminate the entire group of people (e.g., Indian Wars to 
      remove Native Americans, Final Solution of ``Jewish 
      Problem'' in Germany, and Ethnic cleansing in Armenia.).

Gordon Allport, The Nature of Prejudice (Addison-Wesley 1954).

                             LEGAL ANALYSIS

Federalism Concerns as to Section 249(a)(2)
    The bill was carefully drafted to ensure that the Federal 
Government will continue to limit its prosecutions of hate 
crimes--particularly those motivated by actual or perceived 
animus based on gender--to the small set of cases that 
implicate the greatest Federal interest and present the 
greatest need for Federal intervention. This bill is not 
intended to federalize, for example, all rapes, sexual 
assaults, acts of domestic violence, or other gender-based 
crimes.
    The express language of Section 7(b) sets forth several 
significant limiting principles. First, the bill requires proof 
that the violence be motivated by animus based on actual or 
perceived sexual orientation, gender, gender identity, or 
disability. This statutory animus requirement, which the 
Government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt, will limit the 
pool of potential Federal cases to those in which the evidence 
of bias motivation is sufficient to distinguish them from 
ordinary crimes of violence left to State prosecution.
    Second, the bill requires a nexus to interstate commerce 
for all Federal hate crimes based on sexual orientation, 
gender, gender identity, or disability. This interstate 
commerce requirement, which the Government must prove beyond a 
reasonable doubt, will limit Federal jurisdiction in these new 
categories to cases that implicate Federal interests.
    Third, the bill limits Federal hate crimes based on sexual 
orientation, gender, gender identity, or disability to those 
involving bodily injury or death (and a limited set of attempts 
to cause bodily injury or death). These limitations will 
confine Federal cases to truly serious offenses. All violations 
of Section 249 are felonies; there are no misdemeanor 
provisions that could potentially permit Federal involvement in 
prosecuting minor offenses.
    Finally, the bill requires certification, by the Attorney 
General or other specified high-ranking, Department of Justice 
official, that: ``(1) he or she has reasonable cause to believe 
that the actual or perceived race, color, national origin, 
religion, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or 
disability of any person was a substantial motivating factor 
underlying the defendant's conduct; and (2) that he or his 
designee, or she or her designee, has consulted with State or 
local law enforcement officials regarding the prosecution and 
determined that: (a) the State does not have jurisdiction or 
refuses to assume jurisdiction; or (b) the State has requested 
that the Federal Government assume jurisdiction; (c) the State 
does not object to the Federal Government assuming 
jurisdiction; or (d) actions by State and local law enforcement 
officials have left demonstrably unvindicated the Federal 
interest in eradicating bias-motivated violence.'' This 
certification requirement is intended to ensure that the 
Federal Government will assert its new hate crimes jurisdiction 
only in a principled and properly limited fashion, and is in 
keeping with procedures under the current Federal hate crimes 
statute.
    Additionally, based upon the testimony of Justice 
Department officials, we expect the efforts of the Department 
under the new substantive provisions of this legislation to be 
guided by Department-wide policies that impose additional 
limitations on the cases prosecuted by the Federal Government, 
most notably Section 8-3.000 of the United States Attorneys 
Manual.\29\ Section 8-3.000 governs the interaction of Federal 
investigative and prosecutive offices in criminal civil rights 
matters. The notification and approval procedures of that 
Section ensure conformity in application of Federal laws, 
opening investigations, and staffing cases. The review 
processes set forth in the U.S. Attorney's Manual will provide 
an important safeguard against overly expansive enforcement or 
untested theories being brought by individual prosecutors or 
agents.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \29\See Testimony of Eric Holder, Deputy Attorney General, 106th 
Congress 13, 17-18 (1999).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Constitutionality (Sections 249(a)(1) and 249(a)(2))
    The bill is consistent with a long history of Federal 
involvement in combating criminal conduct. As the Department of 
Justice articulated in a 2000 Statement of Administration 
Position, the 13th amendment broadly authorizes Congress to 
regulate acts of violence committed on the basis of race, 
color, religion, or national origin.\30\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \30\Statement of Administration Position, June 13, 2000 (Assistant 
Attorney General Robert Raben).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    As to actual or perceived sexual orientation, gender, 
gender identity or disability, the Commerce Clause provides 
Congress ample authority to prosecute acts of violence 
motivated by animus based on these characteristics where the 
act has the requisite connection to interstate commerce. To 
avoid constitutional concerns arising from the decision in 
United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995), the bill requires 
that the Government prove beyond a reasonable doubt, as an 
element of the offense, a nexus to interstate commerce in every 
prosecution brought under one of the newly created categories 
of 18 U.S.C. 249(a)(2).
    This interstate commerce element was drafted to invoke the 
full scope of Congress's Commerce Clause power, and to ensure 
that hate crimes prosecutions brought under the new 18 U.S.C. 
249(a)(2) will not be mired in constitutional litigation. The 
interstate commerce nexus required by the bill is analogous to 
that required in other Federal criminal statutes. The Church 
Arson Prevention Act of 1996, 18 U.S.C. Sec. 247, for example, 
makes it a crime to destroy religious property if the offense 
``is in or affects interstate commerce.'' 18 U.S.C. 
Sec. 247(b). Section 249 in the bill is drawn to comport with 
Supreme Court guidance in Lopez and U.S. v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 
598 (2000) (setting forth outer reaches of commerce power in 
invalidating civil provisions of Violence Against Women Act).
    Finally, to the extent that there may be open questions 
regarding the precise contours of the range of circumstances 
under which the enforcement provision of the 13th amendment 
authorizes Congress to criminalize hate crimes committed on the 
basis of religion, the legislation has included hate crimes 
based on religious beliefs in both 18 U.S.C. 249(a)(1), which 
is based on Congress' enforcement powers under the 13th 
amendment and does not require proof of a nexus to interstate 
commerce, and 18 U.S.C. 249(a)(2), which is based on Congress' 
powers under the Commerce Clause and contains an interstate 
commerce element that must be proved by the Government beyond a 
reasonable doubt in each case.\31\ The inclusion of religion in 
both subsection (a)(1) and subsection (a)(2) will enable 
prosecutors to determine, based on the facts of each case 
before them, how best to proceed in light of possible 
constitutional challenges that might be brought.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \31\The scope of the 13th amendment, and Congress's power to 
regulate thereunder, was considered by the Supreme Court in Saint 
Francis College v. Al-Khazraii, 481 U.S. 604, 613 (1987) and Shaare 
Tefila Congregation v. Cobb, 481 U.S. 615, 617-18 (1987). In those 
cases, the Court held that civil anti-discrimination statutes enacted 
under the 13th amendment during Reconstruction apply to religions, at 
least to the extent that such religions were seen as ``races'' at the 
time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Free Speech
    The bill has been crafted in a fashion that fully protects 
first amendment and other constitutional rights. The bill is 
designed only to punish violent acts, not beliefs or thoughts--
even violent thoughts. The legislation does not punish, nor 
prohibit in any way, name-calling, verbal abuse, or expressions 
of hatred toward any group, even if such statements are 
hateful. Moreover, nothing in this legislation prohibits the 
lawful expression of one's deeply held religious or personal 
beliefs. The bill only covers violent actions that result in 
death or bodily injury committed because the victim has one of 
the specified actual or perceived characteristics.
    In addition, 249(d) provides that evidence of association 
or expression may not be introduced as substantive evidence at 
trial (though such evidence may be used as impeachment) unless 
it specifically relates to the offense. This provision is 
written to harmonize competing interests--it recognizes the 
need to protect first amendment rights to express unpopular 
beliefs, but recognizes the need to permit the proper use of 
evidence of an accused's statements and associations when they 
specifically relate to the offense.
    This provision ensures that evidence of mere expression or 
association is not permitted to be introduced at trial--that a 
person has expressed beliefs, for example, including religious 
beliefs, or belongs to an organization, including a religious 
organization, that holds or professes beliefs, that may be 
consistent with the crime charged. The provision recognizes 
that the use of an individual's statements or associations may 
well be unfairly prejudicial if there is little other evidence 
linking the accused to the offense.
    It is not possible to provide a complete set of examples 
that capture the range of circumstances where such expressions 
or associations would be admitted or excluded. Nonetheless, 
this provision requires the district court to employ, in 
essence, a heightened relevance standard that takes into 
account the policy values associated with protecting the rights 
of free religious expression, free speech, and free 
association, and to consider the potential for unfair prejudice 
if the evidence at issue consists of unpopular speech or 
association with an unpopular group. This provision also 
recognizes that evidence of speech, conduct or associations of 
an accused is not unfairly prejudicial if it can be shown to be 
specifically related to the crime at issue.
    An isolated racial slur remote in time to the charged 
offense, or mere membership in an organization that professes 
strong negative views toward a given group would, presumably, 
be excluded. Even an incidental racial slur uttered in the 
course of the crime might be excluded if it were clear that it 
was not the motive--uttered in the course of an otherwise 
ordinary robbery, for example.
    In contrast, a violence-themed set of statements displaying 
animus toward the victim's group, or statements evidencing 
hatred of a given group, persisting over a lengthy period or 
close in time to the alleged offense, made in a way that 
indicates that such hatred is the motive for the violence, are 
more likely to be properly admitted as evidence. In these 
examples, there would need to be other independent evidence of 
the accused's participation in the crime, and the court would 
retain the discretion to determine that the particular evidence 
was otherwise unfairly prejudicial.
    Moreover, this provision does not provide a license to 
commit perjury. If a witness, for example, were to deny knowing 
the accused, the witness could be impeached by showing they 
belonged to the same organization and were in each other's 
company. If an accused were to deny having animus toward the 
victim's group, he or she could be impeached by prior 
statements the accused has made that expressed such animus--
even if they had been excluded in the government's case in 
chief because they were remote in time. This comports with the 
overarching goals of the Federal Rules of Evidence that deny a 
witness safe harbor to commit perjury, by ensuring that a 
witness who gives false testimony may be impeached.
    The legislation also includes a ``rule of construction'' in 
Section 8, to lay to rest concerns raised in the 110th Congress 
mark-up of the legislation, and repeated since then, that 
religious speech or expression by clergy could form the basis 
of a prosecution. The rule of construction affirms that nothing 
in this legislation ``shall be construed to prohibit any 
expressive conduct protected from legal prohibition by, or any 
activities protected by, the Constitution.'' Nothing in this 
legislation would prohibit the constitutionally protected 
expression of one's religious beliefs.
    Finally, any lingering doubts about the constitutionality 
of hate crimes laws were squarely addressed by the Supreme 
Court in the early 1990's in two cases, R.A.V. v. City of St. 
Paul, 505 U.S. 377 (1992) and Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 
476 (1993). In Wisconsin v. Mitchell, the Supreme Court 
clarified that the first amendment does not prohibit the 
evidentiary use of speech to establish the elements of a crime 
or to prove motive or intent. These cases clearly demonstrate 
that a hate crimes statute may consider bias motivation when 
that motivation is directly connected to a defendant's criminal 
conduct. By requiring this connection to criminal activity, 
this legislation does not chill protected speech, and does not 
violate the first amendment.

                                Hearings

    In the last Congress, the Committee's Subcommittee on 
Crime, Terrorism, and Homeland Security held 1 day of hearings 
on substantially identical legislation, H.R. 1592, on April 17, 
2007. Testimony was received from Mark L. Shurtleff, Attorney 
General of the State of Utah; Timothy Lynch, Director, Project 
on Criminal Justice, Cato Institute; Frederick M. Lawrence, 
Dean, the George Washington University Law School; David 
Ritcheson, Harris County, Texas; Brad W. Dacus, President, 
Pacific Justice Institute; and, Jack McDevitt, Associate Dean, 
Northeastern University. That bill was reported by the 
Judiciary C0ommittee on April 30, 2007, and passed the House on 
May 3, 2007.

                        Committee Consideration

    On April 22, 2009, the Committee met in open session and 
ordered the bill H.R. 1913 favorably reported with amendment, 
by a rollcall vote of 25 to 12, a quorum being present.

                            Committee Votes

    In compliance with clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the 
following rollcall votes occurred during the Committee's 
consideration of H.R. 1913:
    1. An amendment by Mr. Goodlatte to broaden the protected 
classes in the bill to include status as a senior citizen who 
has attained the age of 65 years. Defeated 15 to 11.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................
Mr. Berman......................................................                              X
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................                              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................                              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................                              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................                              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................                              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................
Mr. Sherman.....................................................                              X
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................                              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................                              X
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................                              X
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................
Mr. Maffei......................................................                              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................              X
Mr. Rooney......................................................              X
Mr. Harper......................................................
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             11              15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    2. An amendment by Mr. Franks to bar prosecution where the 
offender was, at the time of the offense, engaged in conduct 
protected by the first amendment to the Constitution. Defeated 
16 to 11.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 2
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................
Mr. Berman......................................................                              X
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................                              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................                              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................                              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................                              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................
Mr. Sherman.....................................................
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................                              X
Mr. Weiner......................................................                              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................                              X
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................                              X
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................                              X
Mr. Maffei......................................................                              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................
Mr. Rooney......................................................              X
Mr. Harper......................................................
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             11              16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    3. An amendment by Mr. Rooney to include in the bill crimes 
where the victim's status was that of a member of the armed 
forces. Defeated 11 to 9.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 3
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................                              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................                              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................                              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................
Mr. Sherman.....................................................
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................                              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................                              X
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................
Mr. Maffei......................................................
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................
Mr. Gallegly....................................................              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................              X
Mr. Rooney......................................................              X
Mr. Harper......................................................
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................              9              11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    4. An amendment by Mr. Gohmert to add the death penalty to 
the penalty provision of the bill. Defeated 11 to 8.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 4
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................                              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................                              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................                              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................                              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................
Mr. Sherman.....................................................
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................
Mr. Schiff......................................................                              X
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................
Mr. Maffei......................................................
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................
Mr. Coble.......................................................
Mr. Gallegly....................................................              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................
Mr. Poe.........................................................
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................              X
Mr. Rooney......................................................              X
Mr. Harper......................................................
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................              8              11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    5. An amendment by Mr. Gohmert to the Department of Justice 
Certification Provision to add a requirement that a State has 
no law prohibiting the conduct constituting the defendant's 
alleged crimes before allowing the assertion of Federal 
jurisdiction. Defeated 12 to 9.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 5
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................                              X
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................                              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................                              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................                              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................
Mr. Sherman.....................................................
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................
Mr. Schiff......................................................                              X
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................                              X
Mr. Maffei......................................................                              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................
Mr. Gallegly....................................................              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................
Mr. Poe.........................................................
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................              X
Mr. Rooney......................................................              X
Mr. Harper......................................................
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................              9              12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    6. An amendment by Mr. Gohmert to add a Rule of 
Construction that no prosecution may be based in whole or in 
part on religious beliefs quoted from the Bible, the Tanakh, or 
the Koran. Defeated 11 to 8.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 6
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................                              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................                              X
Ms. Waters......................................................                              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................                              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................
Mr. Sherman.....................................................
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................
Mr. Maffei......................................................                              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................
Mr. Coble.......................................................              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................
Mr. Poe.........................................................
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................              X
Mr. Rooney......................................................              X
Mr. Harper......................................................
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................              8              11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    7. An amendment by Mr. King to rename the bill ``Local Law 
Enforcement Thought Crimes Prevention Act of 2009.'' Defeated 
15 to 10.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 7
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................                              X
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................                              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................                              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................                              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................                              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................
Mr. Sherman.....................................................                              X
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................                              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................                              X
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................
Mr. Maffei......................................................                              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................              X
Mr. Rooney......................................................              X
Mr. Harper......................................................              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             10              15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    8. Motion to table an appeal of the Chair's ruling that the 
Jordan amendment to broaden the protected classes in the bill 
to include an unborn child was non-germane. Agreed to 14 to 10.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 8
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................              X
Mr. Berman......................................................              X
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................              X
Mr. Watt........................................................              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................
Mr. Cohen.......................................................              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................
Mr. Sherman.....................................................              X
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................              X
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................
Mr. Maffei......................................................              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................                              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................                              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................                              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................                              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................                              X
Mr. King........................................................                              X
Mr. Franks......................................................
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................                              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................                              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................                              X
Mr. Rooney......................................................
Mr. Harper......................................................                              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             14              10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    9. An amendment by Mr. Goodlatte to broaden protected 
classes in the bill to cover crimes where the victim's status 
was that of a pregnant woman. Defeated 13 to 9.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 9
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................                              X
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................                              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................                              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................                              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................                              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................
Mr. Sherman.....................................................                              X
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................                              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................                              X
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................
Mr. Maffei......................................................
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................
Mr. Gallegly....................................................
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................              X
Mr. Rooney......................................................
Mr. Harper......................................................              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................              9              13
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    10. An amendment by Mr. King to replace the term ``gender'' 
with the term ``sex'' throughout the bill and strike the term 
``gender identity.'' Defeated 16 to 10.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................                              X
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................                              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................                              X
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................                              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................                              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................                              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................
Mr. Sherman.....................................................                              X
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................                              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................                              X
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................
Mr. Maffei......................................................                              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................
Mr. Gallegly....................................................              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................              X
Mr. Rooney......................................................
Mr. Harper......................................................              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             10              16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    11. An amendment by Mr. King to broaden the protected 
classes in the bill to include anyone possessing any immutable 
characteristic. Defeated 10 to 9.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 11
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................                              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................
Mr. Johnson.....................................................
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................
Mr. Sherman.....................................................
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................                              X
Mr. Weiner......................................................                              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................                              X
Mr. Maffei......................................................                              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................
Mr. Jordan......................................................              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................              X
Mr. Rooney......................................................              X
Mr. Harper......................................................
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................              9              10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    12. An amendment by Mr. King to create a new category of 
criminal offense for crimes committed by illegal immigrants 
against nationals of the United States because of the U.S. 
national's status as a U.S. national or U.S. citizen. Defeated 
14 to 11.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................                              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................                              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................                              X
Mr. Wexler......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................
Mr. Sherman.....................................................
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................                              X
Mr. Weiner......................................................                              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................                              X
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................                              X
Mr. Maffei......................................................                              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................              X
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................
Mr. Poe.........................................................              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................              X
Mr. Rooney......................................................              X
Mr. Harper......................................................
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             11              14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    13. An amendment by Mr. King to replace the term ``gender'' 
with the term ``sex'' throughout the bill. Defeated 16 to 11.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 13
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................                              X
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................                              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................                              X
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Delahunt....................................................                              X
Mr. Wexler......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................                              X
Mr. Sherman.....................................................
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................                              X
Mr. Weiner......................................................                              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................                              X
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................                              X
Mr. Maffei......................................................                              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................
Mr. Poe.........................................................              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................              X
Mr. Rooney......................................................              X
Mr. Harper......................................................              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             11              16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    14. An amendment by Mr. King to add an additional element 
of proof to the substantive offense, requiring proof of intent 
to intimidate or terrorize the class of persons to which the 
victim belongs. Defeated 10 to 8.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................                              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................
Mr. Johnson.....................................................
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................                              X
Mr. Sherman.....................................................                              X
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................                              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................
Mr. Maffei......................................................                              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................
Mr. Rooney......................................................
Mr. Harper......................................................
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................              8              10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    15. An amendment by Mr. King to define the term ``sexual 
orientation'' as used in the bill to explicitly exclude 
pedophilia. Defeated 13 to 10.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 15
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................                              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................                              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................                              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................                              X
Mr. Sherman.....................................................                              X
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................                              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................
Mr. Maffei......................................................                              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................
Mr. Rooney......................................................
Mr. Harper......................................................
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             10              13
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    16. An amendment by Mr. Goodlatte to strike the text 
setting forth the basis of bias against the protected classes 
as an element of the offense, thereby broadening the scope of 
the bill to include all violent crimes against persons. 
Defeated 14 to 11.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 16
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................                              X
Mr. Berman......................................................                              X
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................
Mr. Scott.......................................................                              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................                              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................                              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................                              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................                              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................                              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................                              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................                              X
Mr. Sherman.....................................................                              X
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................                              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................
Mr. Weiner......................................................                              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................
Mr. Maffei......................................................                              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................
Mr. Forbes......................................................              X
Mr. King........................................................              X
Mr. Franks......................................................              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................
Mr. Rooney......................................................              X
Mr. Harper......................................................
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             11              14
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    17. Motion to report H.R. 1913 favorably, as amended. 
Passed 15 to 12.

                                                 ROLLCALL NO. 17
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Ayes            Nays           Present
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Conyers, Jr., Chairman......................................              X
Mr. Berman......................................................              X
Mr. Boucher.....................................................
Mr. Nadler......................................................
Mr. Scott.......................................................              X
Mr. Watt........................................................
Ms. Lofgren.....................................................              X
Ms. Jackson Lee.................................................
Ms. Waters......................................................              X
Mr. Delahunt....................................................
Mr. Wexler......................................................              X
Mr. Cohen.......................................................              X
Mr. Johnson.....................................................              X
Mr. Pierluisi...................................................              X
Mr. Gutierrez...................................................              X
Mr. Sherman.....................................................              X
Ms. Baldwin.....................................................              X
Mr. Gonzalez....................................................              X
Mr. Weiner......................................................              X
Mr. Schiff......................................................
Ms. Sanchez.....................................................
Ms. Wasserman Schultz...........................................
Mr. Maffei......................................................              X
[Vacant]........................................................
Mr. Smith, Ranking Member.......................................
Mr. Sensenbrenner, Jr...........................................                              X
Mr. Coble.......................................................                              X
Mr. Gallegly....................................................                              X
Mr. Goodlatte...................................................                              X
Mr. Lungren.....................................................
Mr. Issa........................................................
Mr. Forbes......................................................                              X
Mr. King........................................................                              X
Mr. Franks......................................................                              X
Mr. Gohmert.....................................................                              X
Mr. Jordan......................................................                              X
Mr. Poe.........................................................                              X
Mr. Chaffetz....................................................
Mr. Rooney......................................................                              X
Mr. Harper......................................................                              X
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
    Total.......................................................             15              12
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                      Committee Oversight Findings

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee advises that the 
findings and recommendations of the Committee, based on 
oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1) of rule X of the 
Rules of the House of Representatives, are incorporated in the 
descriptive portions of this report.

               New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures

    Pursuant to Clause 3(c)(2) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee advises that there is 
authorized to be appropriated $5,000,000 for each of fiscal 
years 2010 and 2011.

               Congressional Budget Office Cost Estimate

    In compliance with clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules 
of the House of Representatives, the Committee sets forth, with 
respect to the bill, H.R. 1913, the following estimate and 
comparison prepared by the Director of the Congressional Budget 
Office under section 402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 
1974:

                                     U.S. Congress,
                               Congressional Budget Office,
                                    Washington, DC, April 27, 2009.
Hon. John Conyers, Jr., Chairman,
Committee on the Judiciary,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Chairman: The Congressional Budget Office has 
prepared the enclosed cost estimate for H.R. 1913, the ``Local 
Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 2009.''
    If you wish further details on this estimate, we will be 
pleased to provide them. The CBO staff contact is Mark 
Grabowicz, who can be reached at 226-2860.
            Sincerely,
                                      Douglas W. Elmendorf,
                                                  Director.

Enclosure

cc:
        Honorable Lamar S. Smith.
        Ranking Member
H.R. 1913--the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention Act of 
        2009.

                                SUMMARY

    H.R. 1913 would establish certain hate crimes as new 
federal offenses and would authorize the appropriation of:

         L$5 million for each of fiscal years 2009 and 
        2010 for DOJ to make grants to state, local, and tribal 
        governments to investigate and prosecute hate crimes;

         LSuch sums as may be necessary for DOJ to make 
        grants to state, local, and tribal governments to 
        address hate crimes committed by juveniles; and

         LSuch sums as may be necessary for fiscal 
        years 2009 through 2011 for DOJ and the Department of 
        the Treasury to investigate and prosecute hate crimes.

    Assuming appropriation of the necessary amounts, CBO 
estimates that implementing H.R. 1913 would cost about $10 
million over the 2010-2014 period. The legislation could affect 
direct spending and revenues, but CBO estimates that any such 
effects would not be significant in any year.
    H.R. 1913 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA) 
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal 
governments.

                ESTIMATED COST TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

    The estimated budgetary impact of H.R. 1913 is shown in the 
following table. The costs of this legislation fall within 
budget function 750 (administration of justice).

                                     By Fiscal Year, in Millions of Dollars
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                2010    2011    2012    2013    2014   2010-2014
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATION
Estimated Authorization Level                                      10       *       0       0       0        10

Estimated Outlays                                                   2       3       2       2       1        10
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Note: * = less than $500,000.

    CBO assumes that the bill will be enacted near the start of 
fiscal year 2010. Based on spending for similar activities in 
recent years, CBO estimates that the bill's authorization for 
grants to address hate crimes committed by juveniles would cost 
an additional $5 million in fiscal year 2010--the same amount 
that the bill would specifically authorize for grants to state 
and local governments to combat hate crimes in general. We 
assume that the necessary amounts (a total of $10 million for 
2010) will be appropriated by the start of that fiscal year and 
that spending will follow the historical rates for similar 
grant programs.
    Based on trends in federal investigations and prosecutions 
in recent years, CBO expects that the new hate crimes 
established by the bill would apply to a small number of cases 
each year. Thus, any increase in costs to DOJ, the Department 
of the Treasury, and the federal judiciary for law enforcement, 
court proceedings, or prison operations would be less than 
$500,000 annually for 2010 through 2011, subject to the 
availability of appropriated funds.
    Because those prosecuted and convicted under H.R. 1913 
could be subject to criminal fines, the federal government 
might collect additional fines if the legislation is enacted. 
Collections of such fines are recorded in the budget as 
revenues, which are deposited in the Crime Victims Fund and 
later spent. CBO expects that any additional revenues and 
direct spending would be negligible because of the small number 
of cases involved.

              INTERGOVERNMENTAL AND PRIVATE-SECTOR IMPACT

    H.R. 1913 contains no intergovernmental or private-sector 
mandates as defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, 
local, or tribal governments. Assuming the appropriation of 
authorized and estimated amounts, those governments would 
receive $10 million to investigate and prosecute hate crimes. 
The bill also would authorized the Attorney General to provide 
technical, forensic, and prosecutorial assistance to those 
governments. Any costs to nonfederal entities would be incurred 
voluntarily as a condition of receiving federal assistance.

                         ESTIMATE PREPARED BY:

Federal Costs: Mark Grabowicz
Impact on State, Local, and Tribal Governments: Melissa Merrell
Impact on the Private Sector: Paige Piper/Bach

                         ESTIMATE APPROVED BY:

Theresa Gullo
Deputy Assistant Director for Budget Analysis

                    Performance Goals and Objectives

    The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of 
rule XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, H.R. 
1913 will assist State and local law enforcement in the 
investigation and prosecution of hate crimes and will permit 
Federal prosecution of hate crimes in appropriate instances.

                   Constitutional Authority Statement

    Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, the Committee finds the authority for 
this legislation in article 1, section 8, clause 3 of the 
Constitution, and in the Thirteenth and Fourteenth Amendments 
to the Constitution.

                          Advisory on Earmarks

    In accordance with clause 9 of rule XXI of the Rules of the 
House of Representatives, H.R. 1913 does not contain any 
congressional earmarks, limited tax benefits, or limited tariff 
benefits as defined in clause 9(d), 9(e), or 9(f) of Rule XXI.

                      Section-by-Section Analysis

    Sec. 1. Short Title. This section names the short title of 
the bill as the ``Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes Prevention 
Act of 2009.''
    Sec. 2. Definition of a Hate Crime. This section defines a 
``hate crime'' as a violent act causing death or bodily injury 
``because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, 
national origin, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or 
disability'' of the victim.
    Sec. 3. Support for Criminal Investigations and 
Prosecutions by State, Local and Tribal Law Enforcement 
Officials. This subsection (a) allows the Department of Justice 
to render technical, forensic, or any other form of assistance 
to State and law enforcement agencies to aid in the 
investigation of and prosecution of crimes motivated by 
prejudice based upon the actual or perceived race, color, 
religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender 
identity or disability of the victim or is a violation of local 
law. Priority is given to crimes by offenders who acted in more 
than one State and rural jurisdiction with extraordinary 
expenses.
    Subsection (b) creates a grant program under the authority 
of the Department of Justice that is design to assist State and 
local law enforcement agencies in funding the extraordinary 
expenses associated with the investigation and prosecution of 
hate crimes. A grant under this provision shall not exceed 
$100,000 for any single jurisdiction in any 1-year period. 
Appropriations are authorized at a level of $5,000,000 for each 
of fiscal years 2010 and 2011.
    Sec. 4. Grant Program. This section creates a grant program 
under the authority of the Department of Justice that is design 
to combat hate crimes committed by juveniles, including 
programs to train law enforcement in identifying, 
investigating, prosecuting and preventing bias crimes.
    Sec. 5. Authorization for Additional Personnel to Assist 
State, Local and Tribal Law Enforcement. This section 
authorizes appropriations of sums necessary, if any, to support 
the response, investigation and prosecution of alleged 
violations of provisions created pursuant to this legislation.
    Sec. 6. Prohibition of Certain Hate Crime Acts. This 
section adds a new provision to title 18 of the U.S. Code to be 
codified at 18 U.S.C. 249--entitled ``Hate crime acts.'' In 
particular, section 249(a)(1) prohibits the intentional 
infliction of bodily injury on the basis of race, color, 
religion, or national origin. Unlike, current law, codified at 
18 U.S.C. 245(b)(2), this new provision does not require a 
showing that the defendant committed the offense because of the 
victim's participation in a federally protected activity. An 
offense under the new 18 U.S.C. 249(a)(1) will be prosecuted as 
a felony only, and a showing either of bodily injury or death 
or of an attempt to cause bodily injury or death through the 
use of fire, a firearm, or an explosive device is required. 
Other misdemeanor attempts will not constitute offenses under 
this section.
    The new section 18 U.S.C. 249(a)(2), prohibits the 
intentional infliction of bodily injury or death (or an attempt 
to inflict bodily injury or death through the use of fire, a 
firearm, or an explosive device) on the basis of religion, 
gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability. This 
provision omits the ``federally protected activity'' 
requirement of 18 U.S.C. 245, but instead requires proof of a 
commerce clause nexus as an element of the offense.
    Subsection(b) of this provision requires a written 
certification from the Attorney General before prosecutions can 
be brought under sections 249 (a)(1) and (a)(2).
    Subsection(d) of this provision establishes that an 
expression or association of the defendant may not be 
introduced as substantive evidence at trial, unless the 
evidence specifically relates to that offence. This subsection 
is not intended to amend the Federal rules of evidence, but is 
intended to ensure that the expressions of, for example, 
religious beliefs or unpopular beliefs, or associations with 
those that express such beliefs, in the absence of other 
evidence of culpability in the charged offense, do not form the 
basis of a prosecution or unfairly prejudice an accused at 
trial, and that such expressions or associations may only be 
admitted at trial where they can be shown, either by the 
content of the statements, the nature of the association, or by 
other independent evidence, to specifically relate to the 
charged offense. Such evidence may be introduced as impeachment 
or rebuttal.
    Sec. 7. Severability. This section shields underlying hate 
crime statutes and amendments from any finding of 
unconstitutionality directed against a specific section or 
amendment of hate crimes law.
    Sec. 8. Rule of Construction. This section provides that 
nothing in the bill shall be construed to prohibit expressive 
conduct or activities protected by the Constitution.

         Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported

  In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of 
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by 
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (new matter is 
printed in italics and existing law in which no change is 
proposed is shown in roman):

               CHAPTER 13 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE

                        CHAPTER 13--CIVIL RIGHTS

Sec.
241.    Conspiracy against rights.
     * * * * * * *
249.    Hate crime acts.

           *       *       *       *       *       *       *


Sec. 249. Hate crime acts

    (a) In General.--
            (1) Offenses involving actual or perceived race, 
        color, religion, or national origin.--Whoever, whether 
        or not acting under color of law, willfully causes 
        bodily injury to any person or, through the use of 
        fire, a firearm, or an explosive or incendiary device, 
        attempts to cause bodily injury to any person, because 
        of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, or 
        national origin of any person--
                    (A) shall be imprisoned not more than 10 
                years, fined in accordance with this title, or 
                both; and
                    (B) shall be imprisoned for any term of 
                years or for life, fined in accordance with 
                this title, or both, if--
                            (i) death results from the offense; 
                        or
                            (ii) the offense includes kidnaping 
                        or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated 
                        sexual abuse or an attempt to commit 
                        aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt 
                        to kill.
            (2) Offenses involving actual or perceived 
        religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, 
        gender identity, or disability.--
                    (A) In general.--Whoever, whether or not 
                acting under color of law, in any circumstance 
                described in subparagraph (B), willfully causes 
                bodily injury to any person or, through the use 
                of fire, a firearm, or an explosive or 
                incendiary device, attempts to cause bodily 
                injury to any person, because of the actual or 
                perceived religion, national origin, gender, 
                sexual orientation, gender identity, or 
                disability of any person--
                            (i) shall be imprisoned not more 
                        than 10 years, fined in accordance with 
                        this title, or both; and
                            (ii) shall be imprisoned for any 
                        term of years or for life, fined in 
                        accordance with this title, or both, 
                        if--
                                    (I) death results from the 
                                offense; or
                                    (II) the offense includes 
                                kidnaping or an attempt to 
                                kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse 
                                or an attempt to commit 
                                aggravated sexual abuse, or an 
                                attempt to kill.
                    (B) Circumstances described.--For purposes 
                of subparagraph (A), the circumstances 
                described in this subparagraph are that--
                            (i) the conduct described in 
                        subparagraph (A) occurs during the 
                        course of, or as the result of, the 
                        travel of the defendant or the victim--
                                    (I) across a State line or 
                                national border; or
                                    (II) using a channel, 
                                facility, or instrumentality of 
                                interstate or foreign commerce;
                            (ii) the defendant uses a channel, 
                        facility, or instrumentality of 
                        interstate or foreign commerce in 
                        connection with the conduct described 
                        in subparagraph (A);
                            (iii) in connection with the 
                        conduct described in subparagraph (A), 
                        the defendant employs a firearm, 
                        explosive or incendiary device, or 
                        other weapon that has traveled in 
                        interstate or foreign commerce; or
                            (iv) the conduct described in 
                        subparagraph (A)--
                                    (I) interferes with 
                                commercial or other economic 
                                activity in which the victim is 
                                engaged at the time of the 
                                conduct; or
                                    (II) otherwise affects 
                                interstate or foreign commerce.
    (b) Certification Requirement.--No prosecution of any 
offense described in this subsection may be undertaken by the 
United States, except under the certification in writing of the 
Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, the Associate 
Attorney General, or any Assistant Attorney General specially 
designated by the Attorney General that--
            (1) such certifying individual has reasonable cause 
        to believe that the actual or perceived race, color, 
        religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, 
        gender identity, or disability of any person was a 
        motivating factor underlying the alleged conduct of the 
        defendant; and
            (2) such certifying individual has consulted with 
        State or local law enforcement officials regarding the 
        prosecution and determined that--
                    (A) the State does not have jurisdiction or 
                does not intend to exercise jurisdiction;
                    (B) the State has requested that the 
                Federal Government assume jurisdiction;
                    (C) the State does not object to the 
                Federal Government assuming jurisdiction; or
                    (D) the verdict or sentence obtained 
                pursuant to State charges left demonstratively 
                unvindicated the Federal interest in 
                eradicating bias-motivated violence.
    (c) Definitions.--
            (1) In this section--
                    (A) the term ``explosive or incendiary 
                device'' has the meaning given such term in 
                section 232 of this title; and
                    (B) the term ``firearm'' has the meaning 
                given such term in section 921(a) of this 
                title.
            (2) For the purposes of this chapter, the term 
        ``gender identity'' means actual or perceived gender-
        related characteristics.
    (d) Rule of Evidence.--In a prosecution for an offense 
under this section, evidence of expression or associations of 
the defendant may not be introduced as substantive evidence at 
trial, unless the evidence specifically relates to that 
offense. However, nothing in this section affects the rules of 
evidence governing impeachment of a witness.

                            Dissenting Views

    We oppose H.R. 1913 as an unconstitutional threat to 
religious freedom, freedom of speech, equal justice under the 
law and basic federalism principles.
    Justice should be blind to the personal traits of victims. 
Under the Majority's hate crime bill, H.R. 1913, criminals who 
kill a homosexual, transvestite or transsexual will be punished 
more harshly than criminals who kill a police officer, a member 
of the military, a child, a senior citizen, or any other 
person. Hate crimes legislation hands out punishment according 
to the victim's race, gender, sexual orientation, disability or 
other protected status.
    We all deplore bias-related violent crimes. Every violent 
crime is a tragedy and we must do everything we can to ensure 
public safety in our communities. Violent crimes committed in 
the name of hatred of a group can be devastating to a victim 
and a community. These crimes must be vigorously prosecuted at 
the state and local level.
    Our criminal justice system has been built on the ideal of 
``equal justice for all.'' If enacted this bill will turn that 
fundamental principle on its head--justice will depend on 
whether or not the victim is a member of a protected category: 
a vicious assault of a homosexual victim will be punished more 
than the vicious assault of a heterosexual victim. A senseless 
act of violence, committed with brutal hatred and viciousness, 
will be treated as less important than one where a criminal is 
motivated by hatred of specific categories of people. Justice 
will no longer be equal but now will turn on the race, gender, 
sexual orientation, disability or other protected status of the 
victim. All victims should have equal worth in the eyes of the 
law, regardless of race or status.
    By opening the door to criminal investigations of an 
offender's thoughts and beliefs about his or her victims, this 
bill will raise more controversy surrounding a crime. Groups 
now will seek heightened protections for members of their 
respective groups, and require even more law enforcement 
resources to investigate a suspect's mindset.
    Even more dangerous, although perhaps unintended, the bill 
raises the possibility that religious leaders or members of 
religious groups could be prosecuted criminally based on their 
speech or protected activities. A chilling effect on religious 
leaders and others who express their beliefs will unfortunately 
result.
    The bill itself is unconstitutional and will be struck down 
by the courts. No matter how vehemently proponents of the bill 
try to defend a Federal nexus--there is simply no impact of 
such crimes on interstate or foreign commerce. The record 
evidence in support of such a claim is transparent and will be 
quickly brushed aside by any reviewing court.
    The Supreme Court, in United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 
598 (2000), struck down a prohibition on gender-motivated 
violence, and specifically warned Congress that the commerce 
clause does not extend to ``non-economic, violent criminal 
conduct'' that does not cross state lines. Nor is the proposed 
legislation authorized under the 13th, 14th, or 15th 
amendments.
    Aside from the constitutional infirmities that riddle this 
bill, the sponsors are seeking to address a problem that is not 
overwhelming our state or local governments. FBI statistics 
show that the incidence of hate crimes has actually declined 
over the last ten years. Of the reported hate crimes in 2007, 9 
were murders and 2 were rapes. Only 9 of approximately 17,000 
homicides in the Nation involved so called hate crimes. A 
majority of the crimes reported by the FBI involved 
``intimidation'' with no bodily injury--words or verbal threats 
against a person. There is zero evidence that states are not 
fully prosecuting violent crimes involving hate. Violent crimes 
are vigorously prosecuted by the states. In fact, 45 states and 
the District of Columbia already have specific laws punishing 
hate crimes, and Federal law already punishes violence 
motivated by race or religion in many contexts.
    At the markup, we sought to address these infirmities with 
the bill--to restore equal justice under law, to protect the 
freedom of expression and religious freedom that is so 
important to our Nation, and to ensure that the enumerated 
powers of the Federal Government are not inappropriately 
expanded. We offered 18 amendments to this legislation but the 
Majority defeated each and every one of our attempts to address 
these problems.

  H.R. 1913 RAISES FIRST AMENDMENT CONCERNS AND OPENS THE DOOR TO THE 
 PROSECUTION AND INVESTIGATION OF SPEECH AND RELIGIOUS ACTIVITIES AND 
                                 GROUPS

    The first amendment to the Constitution provides that 
``Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of 
religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.'' America 
was founded upon the notion that the government should not 
interfere with the religious practices of its citizens. 
Constitutional protection for the free exercise of religion is 
at the core of the American experiment in democracy.
    Hate crimes legislation that selectively criminalizes bias-
motivated speech or symbolic speech is not likely to survive 
constitutional review; however, hate crimes statutes that 
criminalize bias motivated violence may survive a first 
amendment challenge. Cf. R.A.V. v. City of St. Paul, 505 U.S. 
377 (1992) (striking down ordinance that selectively prohibited 
types of hateful speech); and Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 
476 (1993) (upholding a state hate crime penalty enhancement 
for a violent crime and finding that restriction on speech was 
justified when linked to violent act).
    However, hate crimes legislation can have a chilling effect 
on speech and first amendments rights by injecting criminal 
investigations and prosecutions into areas traditionally 
reserved for protected activity. The line between bias-
motivated speech and bias-motivated violence is not so easy to 
draw.
    For example, in prosecuting an individual for a hate crime, 
it may be necessary to seek testimony relating to the 
offender's thought process to establish his motivation to 
attack a person out of hatred of a particular group. Members of 
an organization or a religious group may be called as witnesses 
to provide testimony as to ideas that may have influenced the 
defendant's thoughts or motivation for his crimes, thereby 
expanding the focus of an investigation to include ideas that 
may have influenced a person to commit an act of violence. Such 
groups or religious organizations may be chilled from 
expressing their ideas out of fear from involvement in the 
criminal process.
    Moreover, under existing criminal law principles, the bill 
raises the possibility that religious leaders or members of 
religious groups could be prosecuted criminally based on their 
speech or protected activities. Using conspiracy law or section 
2 of title 18 which allows for the prosecution of anyone who 
aids, abets, counsels, commands, induces or procures the 
commission of a crime, or anyone who ``willfully causes an act 
to be done'' by another, it is easy to imagine a situation in 
which a prosecutor may seek to link hateful speech by one 
person to causing hateful violent acts by another.
    Ultimately, a pastor's sermon concerning religious beliefs 
and teachings could be considered to cause violence and will be 
punished or at least investigated. Once the legal framework is 
in place, political pressure will be placed on prosecutors to 
investigate pastors or other religious leaders who quote the 
Bible or express their long-held beliefs on the morality and 
appropriateness of certain behaviors. Religious teachings and 
common beliefs will fall under government scrutiny, chilling 
every American's right to worship in the manner they choose and 
to express their religious beliefs.
    Hate crimes laws could be used to target social 
conservatives and traditional morality. Hate crimes laws have 
already been used to suppress speech disfavored by cultural 
elites--indeed this may be their principal effect. Of the 4300 
hate crimes against persons reported by the FBI in 2007, over 
2,000 incidents involved ``intimidation,'' usually defined as 
threatening words. The ``intimidation'' category does not even 
exist for ordinary crimes. This vague concept is already being 
abused by some local governments, which target speech in favor 
of traditional morality as hate speech. In New York, a pastor 
who had rented billboards and posted biblical quotations on 
sexual morality had them taken down by city officials, who 
cited hate-crimes principles as justification. In San 
Francisco, the city council enacted a resolution urging local 
broadcast media not to run advertisements by a pro-family 
group, and recently passed a resolution condemning the Catholic 
Church because of its ``hateful'' views. No viewpoint should be 
suppressed simply because someone disagrees with it.

          H.R. 1913 IS INCONSISTENT WITH FEDERALISM PRINCIPLES

    The bill raises significant federalism concerns, and 
provides protected status to victims based on religion, 
national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or 
disability.
    All violent crimes can be ``hate'' crimes, and there is 
little justification for singling out specific groups of 
victims for Federal protection. A Federal law criminalizing 
violent actions based upon a victim's real or perceived 
characteristics would be such an act.
    Such a law criminalizes acts that have long been regulated 
primarily by the states. Under the Federal system, the Supreme 
Court has observed, ``States possess primary authority for 
defining and enforcing the criminal law.'' Brecht v. 
Abrahamson, 507 U.S. 619, 135 (1993) (quoting Engle v. Isaac, 
456 U.S. 107, 128 (1982)). ``Our national government is one of 
delegated powers alone. Under our Federal system the 
administration of criminal justice rests with the states except 
as Congress, acting within the scope of those delegated powers, 
has created offenses against the United States.'' Screws v. 
United States, 325 U.S. 91, 109 (1945) (plurality opinion).
    The Court has viewed the expansion of Federal criminal laws 
with great concern due to their alteration of the balance of 
Federal-State powers. ``When Congress criminalizes conduct 
already denounced as criminal by the States, it effects a 
change in the sensitive relation between federal and state 
criminal jurisdiction.'' United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549, 
561 n. 3 (1995) (quoting United States v. Emmons, 410 U.S. 396, 
411-12 (1973)).
    Congress should not act quickly or without due deliberation 
before it chooses to further federalize yet another area that 
generally lies within the competence of the states. Given the 
principles of federalism that govern the Constitution, Congress 
should not use its powers until it is confident that hate 
crimes are a problem that is truly national in scope.

 H.R. 1913 VIOLATES THE INTERSTATE COMMERCE CLAUSE AND HAS NO SUPPORT 
       UNDER THE THIRTEENTH, FOURTEENTH, AND FIFTEENTH AMENDMENTS

    In addition to federalism concerns, the legislation creates 
Federal jurisdiction on tenuous constitutional grounds, relying 
on the Commerce Clause, and the 13th, 14th, and 15th 
amendments.
Interstate Commerce Clause
    The Supreme Court, in United States v. Morrison, 529 U.S. 
598 (2000), struck down a prohibition on gender-motivated 
violence, and specifically ruled that Congress has no power 
under the Commerce Clause or the 14th amendment over ``non-
economic, violent criminal conduct'' that does not cross state 
lines. The Court concluded that upholding the criminal 
provision of the Violence Against Women Act would open the door 
to a federalization of virtually all serious crimes as well as 
family law and other areas of traditional state regulation. Id. 
at 615-16.
    The Supreme Court's Morrison decision followed several 
other decisions in which the Court clarified the Constitution's 
restrictions on Congress's exercise of its powers under both 
the Interstate Commerce Clause and section five of the 14th 
amendment. See United States v. Lopez, 514 U.S. 549 (1995); see 
also Florida Prepaid Postsecondary Educ. Expense Board v. 
College Savings Bank, 527 U.S. 627 (1999); City of Boerne v. 
Flores, 521 U.S. 507 (1997).
    Federal efforts to criminalize hate crimes cannot survive 
the federalism standards articulated by the Supreme Court. Not 
only does much of the hate crime problem go beyond what 
Congress may regulate under the Interstate Commerce Clause, but 
Congress has yet to perform the extensive fact-finding required 
to demonstrate that hate crimes are a national problem that 
requires a Federal solution.
    In cases in which Congress uses its enforcement powers 
under section five of the 14th amendment, the Court has said, 
it must identify conduct that violates 14th amendment rights, 
and its must tailor the legislative scheme to remedying or 
preventing such conduct. To meet these requirements, Congress 
must conduct fact-finding to demonstrate the concerns that led 
to the law.
    In City of Boerne v. Flores, the Court found that Congress 
had ``little evidence of infringing conduct on the part of the 
States'' in the use of facially-neutral laws to infringe 
religious liberties. City of Boerne, 521 U.S. at 530-32. In 
Florida Prepaid, the Court noted that ``[i]n enacting the 
Patent Remedy Act. . . . Congress identified no pattern of 
patent infringement by the States, let alone a pattern of 
constitutional violations.'' The Court held that Congress had 
found few instances in which states had violated Federal patent 
laws, and so invalidated the Patent Remedy Act's abrogation of 
state sovereign immunity. Florida Prepaid, 527 U.S. at 645-46.
    In order to create a case for the constitutionality of a 
law criminalizing hate crimes, Congress must engage in fact-
finding. Unfortunately, in their haste to rush this bill 
through the Committee, the majority has not done any fact 
finding whatsoever. To meet this standard, the Majority failed 
to hold adequate hearings concerning the scope of hate crimes 
in this country, their numbers, and their impact on the 
economy.
    The only iota of fact-finding to be found in relation to 
H.R. 1913 is section two of the bill, which lays out various 
``findings'' regarding so-called hate crimes. Ironically, and 
inexplicably, the Majority chose to remove this section from 
the bill through adoption of a manager's amendment offered by 
Mr. Scott.
    Until Congress engages in this sort of legislative 
spadework, it will not be able to justify any factual basis for 
its action.
Fourteenth and Fifteenth Amendments
    The 14th and 15th amendments do not provide Congress with 
the claimed authority. The 15th amendment forbids the Federal 
Government or a state from denying or abridging the right to 
vote on the basis of an individual's race, color or previous 
condition of servitude. The 14th amendment prohibits the states 
from denying equal protection of the law, due process or the 
privileges and immunities of U.S. citizenship. Both of these 
amendments extend only to state action and do not encompass the 
actions of private persons. Hate crimes by private persons are 
outside the scope of these amendments.
Thirteenth Amendment
    Section two of the 13th amendment stands on different 
footing. The Amendment proscribes slavery and involuntary 
servitude without reference to Federal, state or private 
action. In order to reach private conduct, i.e. individual 
criminal conduct, Congress would have to find that hate crimes 
against certain groups constitute a ``badge and incident'' of 
slavery. See Griffin v. Breckenridge, 403 U.S. 88, 105 (1971).
    The Court has addressed Congress's power under section two 
in only a few cases, the chief of which is Jones v. Alfred H. 
Mayer Co., 392 U.S. 409 (1968). In that case, the Court upheld 
42 U.S.C. Sec. 1982--passed originally as part of the Civil 
Rights Act of 1866--which was read to bar discrimination 
against African-Americans in the sale or rental of property.
    Unlike the 14th amendment, the Court emphasized, the 13th 
amendment allows Congress to enact laws that operate upon the 
acts of individuals, regardless of whether they are sanctioned 
by state law. Section two of the amendment ``clothed Congress 
with power to pass all laws necessary and proper for abolishing 
all badges and incidents of slavery in the United States.'' 
Jones, 392 U.S. at 439. Therefore, the Court observed, 
``[s]urely Congress has the power under the 13th amendment 
rationally to determine what are the badges and the incidents 
of slavery, and the authority to translate that determination 
into effective legislation.'' Id. at 440. The Court, however, 
has not provided much guidance beyond Jones on what constitutes 
``the badges and the incidents of slavery.'' See, e.g., 
Carpenters, Local 610 v. Scott, 463 U.S. 825 (1983); Griffin v. 
Breckenridge, 403 U.S. 88 (1971).
    Congress should tread carefully before it chooses to pass a 
hate crimes statute on the basis of section two of the 13th 
amendment. Such a law would have to be utterly clear that it is 
based on the grant of authority to combat slavery. Only vaguely 
asserting that some hate crimes might be linked to vestiges, 
badges, or incidents of slavery or segregation would not be 
enough.
    Although there have been few judicial pronouncements on the 
scope of the 13th amendment, the Jones case was limited to 
discrimination on the basis of race, specifically 
discrimination against African-Americans. Efforts to include 
within a hate crimes prohibition those crimes motivated by 
national origin, religion, gender, sexual orientation, 
disability and any other factor other than race would amount to 
a congressional effort to interpret the 13th amendment beyond 
that so far permitted by the Supreme Court. The Court will want 
to ensure that, in defining badges and incidents of slavery to 
include hate crimes, Congress has enacted remedial and 
preventative legislation that seeks to end the true effects of 
slavery, rather than attempting to re-define the term 
''slavery'' or ''involuntary servitude'' as it has been 
interpreted by the Supreme Court.

            STATISTICS SHOW THAT HATE CRIMES HAVE DECLINED 
                        OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS

    FBI statistics show that the incidence of hate crimes has 
declined over the last ten years. In 1997, a total of 8,049 
bias-motivated criminal incidents were reported by the FBI. 
Statistics for four of those years, 2002 through 2005, 
demonstrated a steep decline in the number of hate crimes 
reported. In 2005, for example, 7,163 hate crimes were 
reported. In the last two years for which data is available, 
there has been a slight uptick in the number of hate crimes--
7,722 incidents in 2006 and 7,624 in 2007--but fewer hate 
crimes are committed today than ten years ago.
    In 2007, 51 percent of the crimes involved racial bias; 18 
percent involved anti-religion bias; 17 percent involved sexual 
orientation bias; and 13 percent involved national origin bias. 
Anti-disability bias was about 1 percent. Further, in 2007, 
there were 1,083 violent crimes against persons--rape, murder, 
assault, intimidation, and robbery--that were based on bias 
against sexual orientation, or approximately 3.6 incidents per 
100,000 inhabitants. In contrast, there were a total of 
1,408,337 violent crimes committed in 2007, or about 466.9 
violent crimes incidents per 100,000 inhabitants.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\The 1990 Hate Crime Statistics Act charged the U.S. Attorney 
General to ``acquire data . . . about crimes that manifest evidence of 
prejudice based on race, religion, sexual orientation, or ethnicity, 
including, where appropriate, the crimes of murder, non-negligent 
manslaughter; forcible rape; aggravated assault, simple assault, 
intimidation; arson; and destruction, damage or vandalism of 
property.'' The Hate Crimes Statistics Act does not require collection 
of hate crimes statistics for violent crimes alleged to be motivated by 
``gender identity.'' A 1994 amendment added the disabled to the list of 
groups to be tracked. The Attorney General delegated data collection of 
hate crimes principally to the FBI. The FBI appended information on 
bias motivation to the Uniform Crime Report (UCR).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    According to FBI data, there were 16,929 murders in the 
U.S. in 2007. Of that number, nine murders were classified as 
``hate crimes''. By doing the math, we learn that ``hate-
crimes'' murders make up less than one-tenth of 1% of the 
murders committed in the U.S. in 2007. This begs the question 
of why the House would pass legislation that ignores 99.9% of 
the murders in this country.

           STATE PROSECUTIONS ALREADY ADDRESS VIOLENT CRIMES 
                            AND HATE CRIMES

    Hate-crimes laws are unnecessary: the underlying offense is 
already fully and aggressively prosecuted in almost all states. 
There is zero evidence that states are not fully prosecuting 
violent crimes involving ``hate.''
    Moreover, 45 states and the District of Columbia already 
have laws punishing hate crimes, and Federal law already 
punishes violence motivated by race or religion in many 
contexts. In the absence of data that states are unable to 
prosecute or decline to prosecute hate crimes, there is no 
reason for the Federal assertion of jurisdiction or the 
diversion of Federal resources to such investigations and 
prosecutions.
    Some of the most notorious hate crimes were prosecuted 
under state laws, and there is no evidence that states are 
unable or unwilling to prosecute such crimes. Of the 5 states 
with no current hate crime legislation (Georgia, Indiana, 
Arkansas, South Carolina, and Wyoming), Georgia and Indiana 
have passed legislation pertaining to hate crimes in recent 
years, and in both states the legislation has been struck down 
by the courts.

        NEED TO PROTECT MILITARY, UNBORN CHILDREN, THE ELDERLY, 
                              AND MOTHERS

    In protecting limited categories of groups, such as race, 
religion, sexual orientation, gender or gender identity, the 
Majority rejected our attempts to add other equally meritorious 
groups such as current and former members of the Armed Forces, 
senior citizens, and pregnant women. We can see no reason to 
distinguish among these groups--all of them deserve heightened 
protection against hate-motivated crimes. Despite the evidence 
of crimes targeting these members of these groups, the Majority 
has made its priorities clear, and has done a disservice to our 
Armed Forces, senior citizens, and pregnant women.
Members of the Armed Forces
    We honor our men and women of the military because of their 
patriotism, their commitment to protecting our freedom and to 
serving our country. In times of controversy surrounding the 
use of our military, we have seen unfortunate acts by those who 
use their hostility towards the military to further their 
political agenda.
    For example, recently we were faced with the practice of 
groups protesting at military funerals of soldiers killed in 
Iraq. This sick and despicable behavior intruded on the family 
of the lost soldier and the need for privacy and respect. 
Congress acted in 2006 in passing legislation to restrict the 
right of protesters to interfere with military funerals.
    With the rising debate over the Iraq War, we are seeing 
increased threats to Iraq War veterans. In 2004, Private First 
Class Foster Barton, of Grove City, Ohio, was brutally beaten 
in the parking lot of a music venue in Columbus as he was 
leaving a concert. According to the Columbus police, six 
witnesses who didn't know Barton said the person who beat him 
up was screaming profanities and making crude remarks about 
U.S. soldiers. Barton had been on a 2-week leave from service 
in Iraq when the incident happened. A year later, during a 
peace rally, a war veteran was spit on by a protester at the 
rally. Such incidents were all too common place during the 
upheaval surrounding the Vietnam War, when hundreds of threats 
and spitting incidents occurred against Vietnam War veterans.
    We need to make it clear to everyone that we honor members 
of our Armed Forces. Any act of violence against a member of 
the Armed Forces must be met with swift and sure punishment. 
Crimes against our Armed Forces must be punished at a 
heightened level just like the other groups that are given 
protection under this Act.
    During consideration of H.R. 1913, Mr. Rooney offered an 
amendment to add current and former members of the Armed 
Services to the list of classes protected under this 
legislation. The Majority rejected this amendment and defeated 
it in a party-line vote.
Unborn Children
    Partial birth abortion is a barbaric procedure that cannot 
be tolerated in a civilized society. During this procedure, a 
partially-born, living infant is literally ripped from his 
mother's womb and stabbed in the back of the head. As Senator 
Moynihan stated so poignantly, ``this is just too close to 
infanticide. A child has been born and it has exited the uterus 
and, what on Earth is this procedure?''
    On April 18, 2007, the Supreme Court, in Gonzales v. 
Carhart, 127 S.Ct. 1610 (2007), ruled constitutional the 
Federal law banning partial birth abortions, finding that the 
ban on partial birth abortions does not place an undue burden 
on a woman's right to an abortion because there are alternative 
conventional abortion procedures that can be used if necessary. 
Id. at 1632.
    During consideration of H.R. 1913, Mr. Jordan of Ohio 
offered an amendment to include unborn children killed by a 
partial birth abortion as a class of protected persons under 
the hate crimes statute. Unfortunately, the chair ruled the 
amendment non-germane based on the erroneous rationalization 
that unborn children are not ``persons'' for the purposes of 
the hate crimes law.
Pregnant Women
    All acts of violence against women are abhorrent, but they 
are especially disturbing when committed against pregnant 
women. When a violent crime causes injury to a pregnant woman 
that results in a miscarriage or other damage to the fetus, we 
all share the desire to ensure that our criminal justice system 
responds decisively and firmly to exact appropriate 
punishment.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\In 2004, Congress passed the Unborn Victims of Violence Act, 18 
U.S.C.A. Sec. 1841, and created a separate criminal offense for the 
killing of an unborn child during the commission of a violent crime 
against a pregnant woman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    On December 16, 2004, Bobbi Jo Stinnett, in Skidmore, 
Missouri, was 23 years old when she was strangled to death and 
her unborn child was killed. The killer, Lisa Montgomery, who 
was 36 years old, had met Stinnett in an online chat room and 
met with her at her home under the pretext of buying a dog. 
Montgomery specifically targeted Stinnett because she was 
pregnant. Montgomery had lost a child she was carrying prior to 
murdering Stinnett.
    A 2002 GAO report cited estimates from 15 states that 
between 2.2 percent to 6.4 percent of pregnant women had been 
violently attacked. This is intolerable and we should do more 
to protect pregnant women from attack.
    During consideration of H.R. 1913, Mr. Goodlatte offered an 
amendment to add pregnant women to the list of classes 
protected by this legislation. The Majority rejected this 
amendment and defeated it in a party-line vote.
Senior Citizens
    Our senior citizens are vulnerable, like our children, to 
violent abuse. Recent events have underscored the harm to our 
senior citizens from violent crime, and the need to make sure 
that hate crimes against our senior citizens do not occur.
    On March 4, 2007, a New York City man was videotaped by a 
surveillance camera mugging a 101-year-old woman in the lobby 
of her apartment building. The heartlessness and hatred of this 
attack is clearly conveyed on the videotape when Rose Morat was 
trying to leave her building to go to church. The robber acted 
like he was going to help her through the vestibule and then 
turned and delivered three hard punches to her face and grabbed 
her purse. He pushed her and her walker to the ground. Rose 
Morat suffered a broken cheekbone and was hospitalized. Police 
believe the same suspect robbed an 85-year-old woman shortly 
after fleeing from Rose Morat's apartment house.
    During consideration of H.R. 1913, Mr. Goodlatte offered an 
amendment to add senior citizens to the list of classes 
protected by this legislation. The Majority rejected this 
amendment and defeated it in a party-line vote.

                               CONCLUSION

    As outlined above, H.R. 1913 suffers from numerous 
problems. The Majority's rush to judgment ensures that, even if 
enacted, the hate crimes statute will most likely be overturned 
by the courts, and therefore, will be counter-productive to its 
stated goal of assisting state and local law enforcement to 
reduce bias-motivated violence.

                                   Lamar Smith.
                                   F. James Sensenbrenner, Jr.
                                   Howard Coble.
                                   Elton Gallegly.
                                   Bob Goodlatte.
                                   Darrell E. Issa.
                                   Steve King.
                                   Trent Franks.
                                   Louie Gohmert.
                                   Jim Jordan.
                                   Ted Poe.
                                   Jason Chaffetz.
                                   Tom Rooney.
                                   Gregg Harper.