"Hate crime" prosecution for flushing Koran down a toilet

[Steven Jamar]

The motive is not to express hostile and offensive ideas, but rather to harm
others in a particular religious group.

This line may not be a particularly good or sensible one, but the result
here does, it seem to me, depend upon how one characterizes the action and
what the proof is.

If the act was purely one of speech to express dislike for the teachings of
a particular religion, then it seems Prof. Volokh's discomfort is well
warranted.

But if the act is to express hatred toward a particular group, then it seems
that the state can regulate that for the reasons stated in the material
quoted by Prof. Rosenthal.

And that turns on circumstances and proof of subjective intent sufficient to
satisfy the DA and the jury and the judge.

Steve



-- 
Prof. Steven Jamar
Howard University School of Law
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.ucla.edu/pipermail/conlawprof/attachments/20070729/3dec7ae4/attachment.htm