Matthew Shepard Act: Hate Crime Protections Explained

Introduction

The horrific murders of James Byrd Jr. and Matthew Shepard gave rise to legislation designed to provide protections for individuals of protected classes from hate crimes. The Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act was passed in 2009 and signed into law by President Obama. The law gives law enforcement greater power to prosecute those involved in hate crimes. Essentially, the law elevates hate crimes above other crimes, granting them a special status that makes it easier for law enforcement to obtain a conviction and ensures more stringent sentencing for hate crimes than for comparable offenses.

Background of the Law

Civil rights groups had long sought a national hate crime law. A hate crime law is defined as a law that specifically targets crimes committed as hate crimes. A hate crime is one motivated by the "perpetrator's bias against the victim" (HRC, 2016). A hate crime serves as an act of terror against members of targeted communities, making them afraid to live in certain places or to move freely about the country or within their own communities (HRC, 2016). Hate crimes are generally considered to be more violent in nature than their non-hate equivalents.

Since 1968, hate crime laws had been in place covering race, religion, and national origin, but only when the victim was engaged in specific, federally-protected activities (HRC, 2016). Many categories of people were excluded from these protections, including members of the LGBTQ community, people with disabilities, and anyone not engaged in a federally-protected activity. In the Shepard case, for example, no federal or state laws prescribed hate crime status, which meant that law enforcement could only prosecute on the basis of the underlying offense (HRC, 2016).

The murders of James Byrd Jr. and Matthew Shepard were specifically named in the Act because of their brutality and the openly hate-based nature of those crimes. The Shepard case received enormous media attention and became a cause célèbre among LGBTQ community activists seeking greater hate crime protections (ABC News, 2004). Two of the three killers in the Byrd murder were known racists; at trial, those two were given death sentences while the third defendant received life in prison (Biography, 2016). With Shepard, the law demonstrated an extension of protections to the LGBTQ community, while with Byrd it addressed the need to expand on the limited 1968 protections covering race.

Objective of the Law

The text of the law outlines how it strengthens law enforcement efforts in prosecuting hate crimes. The U.S. Department of Justice identifies three specific subsections. The first broadens the hate crime standard: whereas prior law covered only six federally-protected activities, the first subsection specifically allowed prosecutors to pursue hate crime status for a crime without having to prove any of those activities (Holder, 2009).

The second subsection extends hate crime protections to a wider class of victims, including those targeted on the basis of gender, disability, sexual orientation, or gender identity. This section also imposes limits, however, requiring that "the crime was in or affected interstate or foreign commerce," pursuant to the Commerce Clause (Holder, 2009). This is a notable component of the law, as it likely means that neither the Shepard nor the Byrd murders could actually have been prosecuted as hate crimes under this statute.

The third clause of the Act provides for prosecution of acts committed within the Special Maritime and Territorial Jurisdiction of the United States, but limits its reach to acts of violence committed with weapons. Assaults without weapons and threats of violence are not criminalized by this Act (Holder, 2009).

Conclusion

In a literal sense, the Matthew Shepard Act provides limited direct protection — a serious crime must be committed before any of the Act's provisions come into play. There is little evidence to support the notion that the threat of stricter punishment will have a meaningful preventative effect in reducing hate crimes. Instead, the Act functions on a more symbolic level through two main protective functions.

First, it specifically identifies hate crimes as a distinct class of crime, raising public awareness and signaling to law enforcement that hate is a recognized motivator for criminal behavior. This should help secure convictions and inform sentencing, but more importantly it should foster a much higher level of societal awareness of hate crimes — hate crimes can no longer be dismissed as lacking hate-based motivation, as they have been in the past.

Second, and perhaps more significantly, the Act was the first federal law to extend recognition to the LGBTQ community. The community had long fought for acknowledgment — and, in particular, recognition that it is frequently targeted on the basis of hate. By establishing this protection, the law raises the profile of LGBTQ rights at the federal level, provides a model for states to enact their own hate crime legislation, and motivates law enforcement to afford this community a higher level of protection, knowing that specific federal provisions exist to safeguard it from hate-based violence.

On these terms, the Shepard Act is effective. The Act is constrained by the limitations of the Commerce Clause and does not extend to threats of violence, but it serves as a starting point for ensuring that all Americans have equivalent rights with respect to protection from violence. It also provides a framework for law enforcement to recognize that inherent right for the LGBTQ community in particular.