New Hate Crime Bill Protecting Cops Passes House Despite Clear 10th Amendment Violation

Source: Blacklisted News/Reason
Published: May 17, 2018
Author: Elizabeth Nolan Brown
Post Date: 2018-05-18 06:52:02 by Deckard
Views: 1781

Reason – by Elizabeth Nolan Brown

“Protect and Serve Act” passes House. File under bipartisan-is-just-another-word-for-both-sides-licking-the-same-boot: majorities of both Democrats and Republicans in the U.S. House of Representatives have voted in favor of new hate crime legislation that sets up cops as a protected class.

Overall, just 35 House members voted against the bill (H.R. 5698), which isn’t far from making it a federal crime to resist arrest. Under the so-called “Protect and Serve Act,” anyone who injures or attempts to injure a police officer will be guilty of a federal offense—no matter how small the injury and no matter if it was intentional—if the offense has some connection to or effect on interstate commerce.  

The House Liberty Caucus opposed the creation of this new federal hate crime, which it said “violates the Constitution”—the 10th Amendment grants authority to prosecute offenses against state and local cops only to the states—”and furthers the dangerous federalization of criminal law.”

An increasing amount of conduct once only punished at the local level is now falling under the purview of the FBI, the Department of Homeland Security’s HSI unit, and immigration agents. (If the shift from community policing to more metrics-based and militaristic models has had bad effects on civilian-cop relations and incarceration rates, just think how much more damage FBI and ICE agents can rack up!)

Lawmakers are justifying the Protect and Serve Act using (what else?) the Commerce Clause. But this “does not significantly narrow the range of covered offenses or avoid the constitutional violation,” said the Liberty Caucus statement.

A tenuous connection to economic activity cannot transform a criminal law that has nothing to do with economic activity—and that is is explicitly for the purpose of public safety—into a regulation of interstate commerce. If it could, the Commerce Clause would destroy the Constitution’s design for a very limited federal role in criminal law enforcement, covering only a few crimes that are clearly federal in nature.

That ship has long since sailed, alas. But good on the (lonely!) Liberty Caucus for at least trying to stand up against Congress’ use of the Commerce Clause like an incantation that overcomes the Constitution.

A related bill in the Senate is currently with the Judiciary Committee.

Source: https://reason.com/blog/2018/05/17/new-hate-crime-bill-passes-house

Post Comment   Private Reply

#1: Tooconservative    To: Deckard (#0)

—if the offense has some connection to or effect on interstate commerce.

The last refuge of scoundrels. Normally the Commerce Clause scoundrels are found at the Supreme Court but I guess the House wants some of this sweet action.

I'm not sure even the Court will allow such a bill. For one thing, they have the exclusive franchise to cook up phony Commerce Clause cases, not some puny elected politicians. The Court won't like anyone infringing on their phony Commerce Clause territory.

Tooconservative posted on 2018-05-18 06:58:52   Reply   Private Reply


#2: misterwhite    To: Tooconservative (#1)

They should have simply added police and firefighters to the federal hate crime laws. We already protect sex, ethnicity, disability, language, nationality, physical appearance, religion, gender identity and sexual orientation. What's a few more?

And to answer your anticipated question ... no, you're not protected.

misterwhite posted on 2018-05-18 09:32:54   Reply   Private Reply


#3: Tooconservative    To: misterwhite, GrandIsland (#2)

And to answer your anticipated question ... no, you're not protected.

Dang.

But G.I. probably feels better.

Tooconservative posted on 2018-05-18 10:06:19   Reply   Private Reply