expanded equal protection...

House Votes to Expand Hate-Crime Protection

The House of Representatives voted on Thursday to extend hate-crime protection to people who are victimized because of their sexuality. But the most immediate effect may be to set up another veto showdown between Democrats and President Bush.

By 237 to 180, the House voted to cover crimes spurred by a victim’s “gender, sexual orientation, gender identity” or disability under the hate-crime designation, which currently applies to people who are attacked because of their race, religion, color or national origin.

It's about time, but it's still limiting. There are still groups left out. Actually, it leaves many, many groups left out. The wingnuts were working in full force, totally frustrated and irritated that they were going to lose the House vote.

To prove just how irritated they were, the Republicans tried a tactic to kill the bill before the voting by adding an amendment to include the military and the elderly. The Democrats agreed wholeheartedly. The Republican response: they tripped over their lips putting the brakes on their own requested amendment.

Like I said, it's irritating the hell out of the fundies and the bushies. The fundies have redoubled their efforts and gone directly to the source - K. George W. The Executive Office of the President, Office of Management and Budget, already put out a Statement of Administration Policy on H.R. 1592. It was probably written even before the House passed the bill.

In effect, it states that senior staff is recommending to K. George that he veto the bill because they have serious doubts as to its constitutionality.

Moreover, the bill’s proposed section 249(a)(1) of title 18 of the U.S. Code raises constitutional concerns. Federalization of criminal law concerning the violence prohibited by the bill would be constitutional only if done in the implementation of a power granted to the Federal government, such as the power to protect Federal personnel, to regulate interstate commerce, or to enforce equal protection of the laws. Section 249(a)(1) is not by its terms limited to the exercise of such a power, and it is not at all clear that sufficient factual or legal grounds exist to uphold this
provision of H.R. 1592.

[Complete advisory here: Statement of Administration Policy]

...Power granted to the Federal government... to enforce equal protection of the laws...? If this is true, equal in whose eyes? And if legitimate power, then why, pray tell, is there a Federal Hate Crimes law on the books that protects special groups, eg. religious fundies, to begin with? Aren't they saying that the original bill is unconstitutional also? Has anyone taken it to court? I couldn't find any rulings. Is this a signing statement in reverse?

Either include everyone in a hate crimes bill or repeal the exitsting one so nobody has special protection; everyone would have the same equal protection. No special consideration should be given. That would be the only fair way to handle it. True “equal protection.”

Wouldn’t the religious fundies p** all over themselves, if there were a move to repeal the existing bill that basically protects them and includes race, color and national origin. [My guess is they gave this concession to the original bill in order to make sure they were included by name.] See, in this country we are all members of a race, color and national origin. We are all immigrants, don'tja know?

As the Consititution starts -

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

The words "exclude" or "exclusion" appear nowhere in the document. There are no exceptions to the law explained anywhere.