http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-stone23aug23,0,7046013.story?coll=lanews-
From the Los Angeles Times
By Geoffrey R. Stone
August 23, 2007
On May 3, the House voted to pass the Local Law Enforcement Hate Crimes
Prevention Act of 2007. The Senate will take up a companion bill, known as the
Matthew Shepard Act, when it returns from its summer
recess. If enacted, this law would authorize the Justice Department, in certain
narrowly defined circumstances, to criminally prosecute an individual who
"willfully" causes bodily injury to another person or "through
the use of fire, a firearm or an explosive . . . attempts to cause bodily
injury" to another person because of that person's race, color, religion,
national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or disability.
A coalition of conservative African American pastors has aggressively lobbied
against this legislation on the premise that it would make it unlawful for them
to preach that homosexuality is a sin. Bishop Harry R. Jackson Jr., pastor of
the Hope Christian Church in College Park, Md., for example, has asserted that
the act would "keep the church from preaching the Gospel."
This objection to the legislation is fanciful. To begin with, there is no doubt
of the act's constitutionality. In 1993, the Supreme Court unanimously upheld a
virtually identical state law in Wisconsin vs. Mitchell. The court made clear
that "a physical assault is not by any stretch of the imagination
expressive conduct protected by the 1st Amendment." Moreover, the court
emphasized that the government has a perfectly legitimate interest in punishing
"bias-motivated crimes" because such crimes are especially likely to
inflict emotional harm on their victims, incite community unrest and provoke
retaliatory violence.
Of course, the pastors do not intend to assault anyone physically. Their claim,
rather, is that they could be prosecuted merely for preaching against
homosexuality. They fear that such sermonizing might be transmogrified by the
law into an attempt to incite members of their congregations to lynch gays
because of their sexual orientation.
For at least three reasons, this argument is completely unfounded. First, the
Matthew Shepard Act would not prohibit "attempts
to incite." It would prohibit only the infliction of bodily harm and
attempts to cause bodily harm. The latter refers to firing a gun and missing,
not giving a sermon.
Second, it is settled 1st Amendment law that an individual cannot
constitutionally be punished for attempting to incite others to commit crimes
unless the speaker expressly incites unlawful conduct and such conduct is
likely to occur imminently. The last time the Supreme Court upheld a criminal
conviction for incitement was more than half a century ago, in the case of
Dennis vs. U.S., and that involved incitement to violent overthrow of the
government. Unless the pastors intend to expressly incite wild-eyed mobs to
beat up gays because of their sexual orientation, they are in no danger from
this law.
Third, the legislation expressly provides that "nothing in this act . . .
shall be construed to prohibit any expressive conduct protected" by the
1st Amendment. In other words -- indeed, in the most explicit words possible --
the act could not be applied to the pastors unless their sermons are
unprotected by the 1st Amendment, a concept that is impossible to imagine.
The 1st Amendment protects the right of Nazis to march
in Skokie, the right of racists to assert that blacks are inferior, the right
of atheists to denounce Christianity and the right of homophobes to condemn
homosexuality. The argument of the pastors that the proposed legislation in any
way threatens their right to preach their version of the Gospel is, to be
frank, ridiculous.
There might be rational reasons to question the wisdom of this legislation. But
the argument that it endangers the 1st Amendment rights of these pastors is
certainly not one of them.
Geoffrey R. Stone, a University of
Chicago law professor, is the author of "Perilous Times: Free Speech in
Wartime, from the Sedition Act of 1798 to the War on Terrorism," winner of
the 2004 Los Angeles Times Book Award.