¶ … hate crime" and discuss a research question regarding the term. Hate crimes are crimes against individuals or groups based on hatred or non-acceptance of their race, religious beliefs, or other issues. Are hate crimes protected as "free speech" by the First Amendment? Hate crimes can be defined differently by each state with laws against hate crimes. These experts, James B. Jacobs and Jessica S. Henry, define hate crimes as "a crime against persons or property motivated in whole or in part by racial, ethnic, religious, gender, sexual orientation and other prejudices" (Jacobs and Henry). Because hate crimes can fall under different definitions, they can also be interpreted differently. One large question regarding hate crimes is their relationship to the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, which guarantees free speech to all Americans. Are hate crimes simply a First Amendment issue, or do they go much farther than free speech in American today?

Research shows hate crimes are on the upswing in America today. Nazi slogans painted on Jewish temples, racial slurs against Muslims, and murder of young homosexuals have all occurred in the United States in the past few years, along with many other crimes that may go unreported. While America is proud of the freedom she offers to everyone, there is still bigotry and hatred in America, and much of it comes out in hate crimes against minorities and religious groups. Many people arrested for hate crimes feel their crimes are against a group rather than a...

This is why many courts have upheld the right of groups like the Ku Klux Klan to march, and to burn white crosses during their meetings. This is a right of free speech, whether other people agree with it or not. However, many hate crimes take free speech to another level. Some people who commit hate crimes cause physical damage or vandalism, and this goes beyond the realm of free speech. Indeed, the Supreme Court has ruled on this very issue. One law expert writes, "In Landmark Communications, Inc. v. Virginia, 435 U.S. 829 (1978), the [Supreme] Court held that actual evidence of possible societal harm was necessary to justify regulation of expression" (Brooks). Thus, freedom of expression is ruled free speech, but when a hate crime crosses the line, it is still a crime, and not a free speech issue, although there are many who might try to argue that their hate crime was really simply a voicing of their opinion. One legal expert uses the following example, "For example, a defendant facing a penalty enhancer for carrying a gun during a bank robbery could argue, say, that he was expressing his strong opposition to the capitalist system" (Brooks). However, this argument would fail because his actual committing of the crime could cause physical harm to others in the bank, and so, his robbery is more than opposition, it is victimization and physical, rather than just an expression…