Managing Tensions: How American District Attorneys View Their Role in Solving the Hate Crime Dilemma

• In Event: From Detecting to Prosecution Hate Crimes Across Local and Federal U.S. Jurisdictions

Abstract

The recent surge in hate rhetoric and bias crimes poses unique challenges for elected prosecutors nationwide. Through in-depth interviews with 80 district/state attorneys from diverse jurisdictions, we investigated their strategies for addressing three key challenges: (a) the need to reduce overall jail/prison populations while seeking enhanced penalties for hate crimes; (b) safeguarding free speech but preventing hate crimes; and (c) navigating the tension between publicizing hate crime prosecutions for general deterrence without emboldening copycats. While many struggled to articulate their stances, delineating the boundary between protecting free speech and preventing hate crimes proved particularly challenging. We also explore responses with regard to prosecutors’ tenure, race, region, and political affiliation. Most emphasized the importance of depoliticizing hate crime prosecution and prioritizing it irrespective of ideological leanings. In fact, many respondents noted that prioritizing hate crimes has very little to do with whether one identifies as part of the progressive prosecution movement.

Authors

• Besiki Luka Kutateladze, Florida International University

• Melba Pearson, Florida International University

• Neal Palmer, CUNY Institute for State & Local Governance