The Emergence, Content, and Institutionalization of Hate Crime Law
How a Diverse Policy Community Produced a Modern Legal Fact
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 24223234 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Valerie Jenness (University of California System) |
| Year | 2007 |
| Volume | 3 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 141-160 |
| Publication date | 2007-12-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Annual Review of Law and Social Science (BOOK_SERIES) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1550-3585 • E-ISSN: 1550-3631 |
| Publisher | Annual Reviews (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1146/annurev.lawsocsci.3.081806.112733 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 11 |
| References cited | 54 |
This review provides an overview of the emergence, content, and institutionalization of hate crime law as a unique form of criminal and civil rights law originating in the United States and increasingly finding a home in other countries. From the introduction and politicization of the term hate crime in the late 1970s to the increased enforcement of hate crime law at the beginning of the twenty-first century, social movements have constructed the problem of hate-motivated violence; politicians at the federal and state levels have passed legislation defining the parameters of hate crime; appellate court judges have decided the constitutionality of hate crime law; and law enforcement officials have classified, reported, investigated, and prosecuted incidents as hate crime. At the same time, media attention to hate crime has increased, defining the concept for the masses while leading to and reflecting growing acceptance of the idea that criminal conduct is different when it involves an act motivated by (some types of) bigotry, hatred, or bias and manifested as discrimination against (some types of) minorities. An examination of these changes suggests that lawmaking transcends the moment at which a statute is adopted; it is best understood as a larger process of policy domain formation that is enabled and constrained by a policy community intimately connected to extralegal political processes and the workings of loosely coupled bureaucratic structures comprising the criminal justice system.
Hate in the time of the Covid-19 pandemic
Structuring Justice
Universal Jurisdiction and Civil Society
Relational Legal Consciousness in the Context of Hate Crime Laws
Exception to Excess
The Process of Legal Institutionalization
Understanding the context for police avoidance
Neglect, Marginalization, and Abuse
From Hate to Prejudice
A higher bar
Gendered Perceptions and the Costs of Political Toxicity
Hate Crimes
Punishing Hate
The differential protection of minority groups
Hate Crimes
Social Movement Growth, Domain Expansion, and Framing Processes
Have We Got It Right? NSW Racial Vilification Laws Five Years On
Perception and Misperception in Urban Criminal Justice Policy
Hate Crimes
Stigma or Sympathy? Attributions of Fault to Hate Crime Victims and Offenders
Managing Differences and Making Legislation
From Slavery to Hate Crime Laws
A Cross‐burning Is Not Just an Arson”
The Politics of Gay and Lesbian Rights
The Politics of Social Regulatory Policy
Explaining Social Movement Outcomes
The Reconstitution of Law in Local Settings
Hate Crime as a Crime Category Worthy of Policy Attention
The Homogenization and Differentiation of Hate Crime Law in the United States, 1978 to 1995
Hate Crime Reporting as a Successful Social Movement Outcome
Judicial Rhetoric, Meaning-Making, and the Institutionalization of Hate Crime Law
Motivated by Hatred or Prejudice
The Context of Minority Group Threat
The Hate Crime Statistics Act of 1990
Perceptions of Hate Crime Perpetrators and Victims as Influenced by Race, Political Orientation, and Peer Group
Good Intentions
Transforming Symbolic Law into Organizational Action
Ceremonial Justice
The Criminalization of Hate
The Law-In-Between
Ideas, Politics, and Public Policy
Hate Crime
Policy Domains
Institutionalizing Collective Memories of Hate
| Citations per year | 0.73 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2011 - 2025 (15) |
| Highly cited | No |