AFSC Broken Bones Hate Crimes

8/6/2019 AFSC Broken Bones Hate Crimes

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/afsc-broken-bones-hate-crimes 1/55

In a Time of Broken BonesA Call to Dialogue on HateViolence and the Limitationsof Hate Crimes Legislation

B y K a t h e r i n e W h itl o c k

A JUSTICE VISIONS WORKING PAPER

American Friends Service Committee

2001



In a Time of Broken Bones: A Call to Dialogue onHate Violence and the Limitations of Hate Crimes Legislation

A JUSTICE VISIONS WORKING PAPER

Written by Katherine Whitlock

Edited by Rachael Kamel

Editorial committee: Patricia Clark , Rachael Kamel, Kathryn Kurtz, Joyce Miller, Katherine Whitlock

Copyright © 2001 American Friends Service Committee. Permission is granted to reproduce this material

f or noncommercial educational use, provided that any such use credits the author, Katherine Whitlock ,

and AFSC.

Printed copies of this work ing paper are available at cost f rom AFSCs Literature Resources Unit.

Off prints of the executive summary are available f ree of charge f rom AFSCs Community Relations Unit.

Both the complete work ing paper and executive summary are available in downloadable (PDF) f ormat on

the AFSC website (www.af sc.org / JusticeVisions.htm.). For more inf ormation, contact cruweb@af sc.org

or call 215 / 241-7126.

Published by:

Community Relations Unit

American Friends Service Committee

1501 Cherry Street

Philadelphia, PA 19102

tel. 215 / 241-7126

e-mail cruweb@af sc.org



As long as we are on earth, the love that unites us

will bring us suff ering by our very contact with one

another, because this love is the resetting of brok en

bones. Even saints cannot live with saints upon this earth

without some anguish, without some pain at the diff erencesthat come between them . . .Hatred recoils f rom the

sacrif ice and the sorrow that are the price of this resetting

of brok en bones. It ref uses the pain of reunion.

—Thomas Merton, “A Body of Brok en Bones,”

N e w S ee d s o f C o n t e m p l a t i o n

T h e Am e r i c a n F r i e n d s S e r v i c e C o mm i tt ee , f o un d e d i n 1917, i s a Q u a k e r o r g a n i z a t i o n w h o s e w o r k f o r s o c ia l j u s t i c e , p e a c e , a n d h u m a n i t a r ia n s e r v i c e i s c a rr i e d f o r w a r d b y p e o p l e o f m a n y r e l i g i o u s a n d s p i r i t u a l t r a d i t i o n s .W e s ee k t o g i v e p r a c t i c a l e x p r e ss i o n t o t h e

b e l i e f t h a

t t h e

r

e i s t h a

t o f G o d , o

r

s a c

r

e d s p i

r

i t , i n e v e

r y p e

r s o n a n d i n a ll p e o p l e s . O u r p r o g r a m s a r e r oo t e d i n t h e r a d i c a l f ai t h t h a t t h e

p o w e r o f l o v e , g i v e n t a n g i b l e e x p r e ss i o n i n o u r s o c ia l , e c o n o m i c , a n d s p i r i t u a l s t r u gg l e s , c a n o v e r c o m e v i o l e n c e a n d i n j u s t i c e .



4 IN A TIME OF BROKEN BONES



5A CALL TO DIALOGUE ON HATE VIOLENCE AND THE LIMITATIONS OF HATE CRIMES LEGISLATION

Contents

Ac k n o w l e d g e m e n t s . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

E x e c u t i v e S u mm

a r y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

I n t r o d u c t i o n : T h e C a ll t o L o v e a n d J u s t i c e . . . . . . . . . . 11

P a r t I . U s a n d T h e m : H a t e V i o l e n c e a n d I n j u s t i c e . . . . 15

P a r t II . T h e B r o k e n B o n e s o f J u s t i c e . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

P a r t III . T o w a r d a V i s i o n o f H e a l i n g J u s t i c e . . . . . . . . 31

P a r t I V . C r e a t i n g J u s t , B e l o v e d , a n d

G e n e r o u s C o mm un i t y . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39

A pp e n d i x A. K e y E l e m e n t s o f S t a t e

H a t e C r i m e s L e g i s l a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51

A pp e n d i x B . E x i s t i n g a n d P r o p o s e d

F e d e r a l H a t e C r i m e s L e g i s l a t i o n . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53




The publication of this Justice Visions work ing

paper on hate violence ref lects the deep spiritual

and social commitment of the American Friends

Service Committee (AFSC) to address the root

causes, and not only the most visible symptoms, of

hatred, intolerance, and violence.My long associa-tion with AFSC, as a volunteer, staff member, and

consultant, has enriched my lif e and activism

immeasurably and strengthened my own spiritual

commitment to nonviolence.

I am deeply indebted to many colleagues

within AFSC f or their support and assistance in

the preparation of this work ing paper. Special

thank s go to Rachael Kamel in AFSC’s National

Community Relations Unit (CRU), whose credit

as editor hardly begins to describe her contribu-

tions to this eff ort. She has been a constant sourceof encouragement, a wise advisor, a caref ul and

critical reader, a rigorous editor, a great sounding

board, and a treasured f riend.

Patricia Clark , CRU’s National Criminal

Justice Representative, has been a steadf ast and

valued companion throughout this pro ject, as has

Spring Miller, f ormer intern in AFSC’s Washing-

ton, DC off ice. Each has provided invaluable

ref erences, reviewed and commented on successive

draf ts, and off ered thoughtf ul counsel along the

way. Theresa Meisz, Tamar Adler, and BeccaWanner provided essential research assistance.

Joyce Miller, director of AFSC’s Community

Relations Unit, has supported this venture f rom

the beginning, and I am indebted to her f or her

support and counsel. Kathryn Kurtz, CRU’s

associate director, was lik ewise unwavering in her

support and assistance.

Mik e Farrell, Jean Fairf ax, and Judith

McDaniel, human rights activists extraordinare,

read and commented on the f irst draf t. KarenCromley, Sharon Frame, Dennis Hartzell, Kyle

Kajihiro, Bonnie Kerness, Laura Magnani, Stephen

McNeil, Camaron Miyamoto, Eric Moon, Don

Reeves, Jana Schroeder, Jamie Suarez-Potts,Warren

Witte, and Jan Wright all provided invaluable

f eedback on later draf ts, as did the Criminal Justice

Task Force of the National Community Relations

Committee (NCRC) and the entire NCRC.

Ongoing conversations with Jason Riggs and

Carolina Cordero Dyer helped nurture this work .

Many other individuals, too numerous toname, have contributed to this eff ort, directly and

indirectly. To all those who work in light of the

k nowledge that hate violence can never be sepa-

rated f rom the structural violence f rom which it

springs, and that justice is ultimately not merely a

f unction of law, but of community relationship, I

extend my deepest gratitude.

Finally, and with enormous love, I thank

Phoebe Robins Hunter, whose own k indness,

compassion, strength, and vision serve as a remark-

able daily teaching, enriching my own lif e and work .

— K a y W h i t l o c k

M i ss o u l a, M o n t ana

Acknowledgements




T

he f irst hate crimes laws established race,

national origin, and religion as protected

categories. Today, LGBT people, women,

and people with disabilities are also calling f or

attack s against them to be recognized and con-

demned as hate crimes. Partly in response to such

calls, many civil rights, progressive, and f aith-based

organizations have come together to work f or

passage of new f ederal and state hate crimes

legislation, as well as expansion of existing laws.

In recent years, in the wak e of a series of horrif ic

slayings, these eff orts have gained a special sense of

u

rgen

cy.

Hate crimes include not only murder but

many other f orms of harassment, intimidation,

and violence. In the United States, attack s are

directed most of ten against people of color; les-

bian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)

people; immigrants; Jews; women; and people with

disabilities. Such violence is widespread and

demands a powerf ul public response.

When the possibility of peacef ul and compas-

sionate relationships among diff erent groups in our

society is s

hatt

ered by h

ate viole

nce, we are rig

ht tocall f or the healing presence of justice. B u t w h a t i s

j u s t i c e in a t i m e o f b r o k e n b o n e s?

AFSC believes it is necessary to ask some

diff icult questions about hate crimes legislation. If

our goal is to conf ront hate violence eff ectively,

what f orms of law and accountability can help us

to do so? What types of legal mechanisms can

encourage us to work together, across our diff er-

ences, to end these violent expressions of racism,

sexism, homophobia, anti-Semitism, and other

f orms of oppression? What approaches will ulti-

mately work against these ends?

I n a T i m e o f B r o k e n B o n e s presents a loving

and provocative challenge to f riends and allies to

consider the limitations and probable unintended

harmf ul consequences of many hate crimes laws as

they are currently f ormulated — consequences that

compound rather than counteract the systemic

violence of racism, misogyny, homophobia, pov-

erty, and economic exploitation.This AFSC

work ing paper examines k ey elements of hate

crimes laws

,par

ticu

larly th

e cent

ral role

of

pen

altyenhancements. I n a T i m e goes f ar beyond a simple

critique of hate crimes laws, however, lif ting up a

new — and admittedly still evolving and incom-

plete — vision of “healing justice,” rooted in an

ethic of interdependence, nonviolence, radical

generosity, and openheartedness.

The call to love and justice is a joyous call to

resistance and transf ormation.We are called to

resist un just belief s, structures, and practices in

ourselves, our communities, and our society.We

are called to transf orm by example

the corr

u

pt

ethic of dominance and supremacy that declares

some categories of people superior or subordinate

to others — and in so doing justif ies the evils of

racism, sexism, and heterosexism.

The ideas presented in this work ing paper

have grown out of a series of internal discussions at

AFSC, in which we have struggled to clarify our

concerns and consider how best to raise them. In

so doing we have drawn on our long-term pro-

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In a Time of Broken Bones:A Call to Dialogue on Hate Violence

And the Limitations of Hate Crimes Legislation

7










T

o think of hate violence is to think of James

W. Byrd, Jr., an Af rican American f rom

Jaspar, Texas, dragged behind a pick up

truck to an agonizing death by dismemberment in

1998. Or Matthew Shepard, a young gay man,

brutally pistol-whipped and lef t to die on a f ence

outside of Laramie,Wyoming that same year.

Other hate-motivated k illings are less widely

k nown, but equally horrif ic: Jessy Santiago, a gay

cross-dresser f rom the South Bronx, beaten with a

tire iron and stabbed to death with a box cutter,

screwdriver, and k nif e, by a man who had earlier

threatened to “k ill that f ag.” Ly Yung Cheung,

nineteen years old and pregnant, decapitated when

pushed in f ront of an oncoming subway train by a

public school teacher with a “phobia toward

Asians.” A shy and unpopular f if teen-year-old girl

with a learning disability, eager to mak e f riends,

trick ed by some classmates into letting them place

a noose around her neck , hanged, then beaten to

death with a rock in Pennsylvania. A “nameless”

Mexican work er f ound dead in the Arizona desert,

his neck deeply scarred by rope burns, during an

outbu

rst

of ant

i-immigrant

violen

ceby self -proclaimed vigilantes.

Hate violence includes not only murder, but

many other f orms of harassment, intimidation,

and assault. In the United States, such attack s are

mainly directed against people of color; lesbian,

gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) people;

immigrants; Jewish people; women; and people

with disabilities. Over the years, community

activists and law-enf orcement off icials have docu-

——— I n t r o d u c ti o n ———

The Call to Love and Justicemented countless incidents aff ecting many vulner-

able communities ( s ee b o x p a g e 12 ) .

When the possibility of peacef ul and compas-

sionate relationships among diff erent groups in our

society is shattered by hate violence, we are right to

call f or the healing presence of justice. B u t w h a t i s

j u s t i c e in a t i m e o f b r o k e n b o n e s?

Since the 1980s, many civil rights, progres-

sive, and f aith-based organizations have come

together to work f or the passage of hate crimes

laws. The f irst such laws established race, national

origin, and religion as protected status categories.

Today, LGBT people, women, and people with

disabilities are demanding that attack s against

them also be recognized and condemned as hate

crimes. In recent years, in the wak e of a series of

widely publicized slayings, campaigns to pass new

laws and strengthen existing ones have gained a

special sense of urgency.

The American Friends Service Committee

(AFSC) believes that it is necessary to ask some

diff icult questions about hate crimes legislation.

We who struggle against hate violence must be

clear ab

out

wh

at

we are

ask i

ng f or

—and

wh

at

weare getting — when we demand justice. Real saf ety

can never be purchased at the expense of human

rights and human dignity.

In this work ing paper, AFSC urges our

f riends and allies to consider the broader social,

political, and economic context f rom which hate

crimes legislation emerges. If our goal is to con-

f ront hate violence eff ectively, what f orms of law

and accountability will help us to do so? What

11










Hate violence touches all of us, whether or

not we ack nowledge it. It permeates the

environments in which we live, raise

f amilies, work , and seek spiritual sustenance. To

the extent that it is tolerated, denied, or ignored, it

leads to the spiritual and moral corrosion of individuals, f amilies, institutions, communities,

and governments.

Some have suggested that all crime is terrible,

and theref ore all crimes are hate crimes; this

f ormulation, we believe, obscures the f undamental

nature of hate violence. Hate violence is not an

expression of personal pre judice or a volatile

temper; it involves the use of threats and f orce to

k eep oppressed, vulnerable, or marginalized groups

“in their place.” It doesn’t arise in a vacuum, but is

an inevitable, if extreme, expression of the k ind of “ordinary” violence that surrounds us: the struc-

tural violence of institutionalized racism, sexism,

homophobia, and other f orms of oppression.

Groups at the f ar right of the political spec-

trum, such as the Family Research Council (FRC),

have vigorously opposed all hate crimes legislation,

claiming that hate crimes are “a manuf actured

crisis.”1 Most hate crimes, in FRC’s words, “are

not violent crimes but rather ‘simple assault’ or

‘intimidation.’ Simple assault means no serious

in jury occurred, and no weapon was used.” Such

arguments use pointedly casual language to

trivialize human suff ering and dismiss the compli-

cated history of hate violence. In reality, the

violence of hatred tak es many f orms, surging at

diff erent times in response to complex social,

cultural, economic, political, and religious f orces.

Hate violence seek s to terrorize, hurt, or

destroy that which it despises or f ears; it seek s to

crush that which it cannot control. It has been part

of U.S. culture since the arrival of the f irst Euro-

pean

colon

ists.Anyon

e wh

o ent

ers AFS

C’s n

a-tional off ice in Philadelphia passes by a sculpture

of Mary Dyer on the way in. She seems a perf ect

image of spiritual serenity: a seventeenth century

Quak er woman sitting in silent conversation with

God, her eyes downcast, her hands f olded neatly in

her lap. But Mary Dyer was hanged on Boston

Common by the prevailing religious authorities of

her day, because she insisted on remaining true to

the leadings of God as she experienced them. She

was only one of many people, Quak ers and others,

wh

o su

ff ered th

is f ate d

u

rin

g th

e Eu

ropean

colon

i-zation of North America — because their religious

views and practices did not conf orm to the domi-

nant f aith of their day.

——— P ar t I ———

“Us and Them”:Hate Violence and In justice

Until those heif ers came,this was a peaceable k ingdom.

—Toni Morrison, P a r a d i s e

1 See “Talk ing Points: ‘Hate Crime’ Laws Mean Unequal

Protection,” on the Family Research Council website

(www.f rc.org / papers / inf ocus / ; paper No. 1F99I1 in the

archives, dated Oct. 1999).

15























To speak of justice is to speak of bread: of

that which sustains and nourishes us so

that we may one day realize our most

beautif ul hopes and dreams.

The Vietnamese Buddhist monk Thich Nhat

Hanh reminds us that the entire world, with itsintricate interconnections, is contained in all

things. John Woolman, an eighteenth century

Quak er abolitionist and advocate f or the poor,

spok e similarly of his own experience of “the

connection of things,” which is to say, connections

among spiritual leadings, economic practices, and

the treatment of one’s f ellow human beings.

If , f or example, we look ed deeply enough into

a single piece of bread, we would see everything.

We would f ind not only wheat, yeast, and salt, but

also th

e sun

sh

in

e, rain

, and ric

h ear

th th

at nu

r-tured the wheat.We would f ind the sea that

produced the salt.

In this single piece of bread are also the

f armer who grows the wheat and the f arm work ers

who harvest it, and all of their histories. If these

f arm work ers are decently paid and treated with

respect, their well-being is included in this piece of

bread; if they are poorly paid and degraded, we

consume their misery, the hardship of their f ami-

lies, and the violence of this un just relationship.

The bank s are also in this piece of bread,along with every f amily f arm that has ever f aced

f oreclosure, the rise of agribusiness, and the ripple

eff ects of hard times on the larger community.

If we look more closely still, we also f ind

ourselves in this bread and the ways in which we

are related to the f arm work ers, the f armer, the

wheat, the earth, the sk y, the bank , and the history

and f ate of the land itself .

When we look deeply enough, we begin to

see all the ways in which justice and nonviolence

— lik e in justice, hatred, and violence — arisewithin an ever-f luid f abric of relationship. All of

our various struggles f or social, economic, spiri-

tual, and environmental justice are not parallel and

unrelated, but essential, interrelated components of

one evolving story — a story about human rights,

dignity, liberation, justice, and community. The

challenge that f aces us is to open our hearts suff i-

ciently to see the connections and to act in the

light of this understanding.

——— P ar t II ———

The Broken Bones of Justice

Even when they call us mad

when they call us subversives and communists

and all the epithets they put on us,

we k now that we only preach

the subversive witness of the Beatitudes,

which have turned everything upside down

to proclaim blessed the poor,

blessed the thirsting f or justice,

blessed the suff ering.

— Archbishop Oscar Romero

25












percent of the same age brack et in the state’s prison

system. In Ohio, youth of color accounted f or 30

percent of all juveniles arrested and 43 percent of

those placed in secure f acilities, but only 14.3

percent of the statewide youth population. Similar

disparities were observed in Texas and Calif ornia.10

The escalating incarceration of youth is

accompanied by an increasing erosion of young

people’s basic civil rights and even minimal stan-

dards of due process.Minors receive little or no

legal representation in juvenile courts, even though

in many states, those same courts now mete out

adult sentences. Funding f or public def enders has

been slashed over the past two decades, and law-

yers trained in juvenile law are f ew and sorely

underpaid. Children’s records and court hearings

have

been

open

ed t

o th

e pub

lic,

and

ch

ildren’sf ingerprints and photos are being entered more

f requently into police databases. Incarcerated

youth are easy targets f or many diff erent k inds of

abuse, including sexual and physical abuse by

guards and other staff . Even in juvenile f acilities,

minors are of ten given inadequate health care

and sub jected to f orms of “discipline” that range

f rom prolonged restraint to use of stun guns and

pepper spray.

The juvenile justice system as it has existed in

the United States is f ar f rom adequate, but what is

emerging now is considerably worse. Young people

incarcerated with adults commit suicide eight

times more f requently than those in juvenile

f acilities.Minors incarcerated with adults have a

much higher rate of re-arrest af ter release. Given

these realities, do we really believe that criminal

processing is the most appropriate and eff ective

societal response to disaff ected young people who

have learned to hate? Is this the best we can do?

10 “The Color of Justice: An Analysis of Juvenile Adult

Court Transf ers in Calif ornia,” Mik e Males and Dan

Macallair, Justice Policy Institute,Washington, DC, Jan.

2000 (http: // www.cjcj.org / jpi).


















We need to strengthen the capacity of our

communities to respond to outbreak s of hate

violence in ways that initiate processes of healing

f or all who are aff ected.We must also strengthen

community-based eff orts to hold institutions and

public off icials accountable f or hate violence. Our

understanding of hate violence must expand to

include its institutional f orms, such as police

brutality; the use of racial, sexual, and gang prof il-

ing; institutional abuses of the civil and human

rights of all vulnerable and marginalized groups;

and police harassment of sex work ers and LGBT

people. Religious institutions should also be held

accountable f or the spiritual violence that they

regularly direct against lesbian, gay, bisexual, and

transgender people.

Finally, we need to hold ourselves accountable

f or hate violence. How f ar do we go in work ing

constructively within our own communities to expose

the “ordinary” smiling f aces of racism, xenophobia,

sexism, homophobia, and anti-Semitism? Timidity

will not serve us well in these dangerous times.




All of us hunger f or authentic community, in

which we can be celebrated f or being all of

who we are — f or being, in the words of

activist and writer Mab Segrest, “our own peculiar

selves.” We hunger f or personal, civic, and spiritual

meaning. For ourselves and our f amilies (howeverwe understand that term), we seek good schools,

decent housing, healthy f ood to eat, appropriate

and aff ordable medical care, meaningf ul work f or

reasonable wages, saf e neighborhoods, f reedom

f rom violence, clean air and water, and simple

human k indness.We want to k now our neighbors

and be able to depend on them.We need to f eel a

sense of belonging to something that is greater

than ourselves.

Although community is universally valued,

we usually talk about it in abstract and sentimentalterms.We mak e casual use of the word “commu-

nity” as a ref lection of our emotional and spiritual

longings: community is wherever we are cared f or,

respected, valued, encouraged, supported, and

loved. “The community,” which of ten is a way of

ref erring to people who are “lik e me,” is tak en to

be intrinsically just and liberating.

Actual communities, whether they are

geographical, spiritual, or based on other identities

——— P ar t I V ———

Creating Just, Beloved, andGenerous Community

or values, usually nurture and support some of

their members w

hile s

tigma

tizin

g, margin

alizin

g,silencing, casting out, and even destroying others.

Formal and inf ormal practices within every com-

munity create “insiders” and “outsiders”: those

who are worthy and those who are expendable.

To achieve a deeper understanding of hate

violence, we must engage with the paradoxical

nature of community. Since insider / outsider

dynamics ultimately reinf orce the un just distribu-

tion of power and privilege in the larger society,

eff ective strategies to reduce hate violence must

also conf ront the systemic nature of social andeconomic inequality in the United States.

How do our communities respond to the

strangers in our midst, the ones who “aren’t lik e

us,” the ones we don’t k now, have never particu-

larly cared about, and perhaps f ear, resent, or

despise? How do we understand our civic and

spiritual responsibility to those who are most

vulnerable and marginalized?

In this discussion, we consider community in

two ways, each of which serves to locate individu-

als and groups within the larger society. First, weunderstand a community to be the people living in

a particular geographic locale, all of whom are

aff ected, though not always in the same ways, by

the actions of public and private institutions.

Second, we also def ine community as a group of

people who share a common identity — ethnic,

racial, religious, sexual, political, and so on.

Within this second type of community, members

are also lik ely to be treated diff erently — rendered

Wade in the water, children.God’s gonna trouble the water.

— Af rican American spiritual

39




























report them to an appropriate state agency. The

state agency, in turn, is required to provide peri-

odic reports to the governor, the state legislature,

and so on. Some state and f ederal laws also provide

f or special training f or law-enf orcement personnel

in tak ing hate crimes reports and collecting and

reporting data. Federal law requires reporting of

national data, but reporting by local agencies to

the FBI is voluntary.

Civil actions: Some laws provide a civil cause of

action f or harm related specif ically to hate crimes —

that is, they permit the victims to sue f or damages,

instead of or in addition to criminal charges f iled

by state or f ederal prosecutors. Alternatively, in

some jurisdictions, civil damages may be recovered

under

oth

er statut

es n

ot specif ically

rela

ted

to h

atecrimes. In junctions or restraining orders against

the off enders may be requested in some jurisdictions.

Training and education f or law-enf orcement

off icials: Some laws provide resources, usually

quite limited, to support hate crimes-related

training and education f or police off icers, prosecu-

tors, and other law-enf orcement personnel.

Institutional vandalism: Some laws add “institu-

tional vandalism” as a category of hate-motivated

crime that is punishable either as a misdemeanor

or a f elony, depending on circumstances. Institu-

tional vandalism occurs when a person k nowingly

vandalizes, def aces, or otherwise damages houses of

worship or places used f or other religious purposes,

cemeteries, schools, or community centers, includ-

ing their grounds and personal property in such

f acilities.







Documents

AFSC Broken Bones Hate Crimes