Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-TX) recently filed a bill in the House of Representatives that proposes to “prevent and prosecute white supremacy-inspired hate crime and conspiracy” by expanding the definition of hate crime currently found in U.S. law.
Under the title “Leading Against White Supremacy Act of 2023,” the bill has been referred to the Committee on the Judiciary for review and recommendations. Rep. Jackson Lee filed the same bill in 2022 as well.
In the bill, Rep. Jackson Lee claims that “a person engages in a white supremacy-inspired hate crime when white supremacy ideology has motivated the planning, development, preparation, or perpetration of actions that constituted a crime or were undertaken in furtherance of activity that, if effectuated, would have constituted a crime.”
Furthermore, the proposed legislation would classify a criminal conspiracy as any event in which at least one person “engaged in the planning, development, preparation, or perpetration of a white supremacy-inspired hate crime” and another “published material advancing white supremacy, white supremacist ideology, antagonism based on ‘replacement theory,’ or hate speech that vilifies or is otherwise directed against any non-White person or group.”
The definition of published material included anything issued “on a social media platform or by other means of publication with the likelihood that it would be viewed by persons who are predisposed to engaging in any action in furtherance of a white supremacy-inspired hate crime.”
Additionally, Jackson Lee asserted that someone could be prosecuted under a conspiracy charge if something they published “was read, heard, or viewed by a person who engaged in the planning, development, preparation, or perpetration of a white supremacy-inspired hate crime.”
Observers, such as Jessica Washington writing for The Root, claimed the bill would allow commentators such as Ben Shapiro and Tucker Carlson to be potentially prosecuted for white supremacist conspiracy.
In response, Rep. Lauren Boebert (R-CO) attacked the bill on Twitter for “making a mockery of the First Amendment.”
Rep. Jackson Lee retorted, “Lauren, you would think now that you’re in the majority, you would actually consider reading the bills you tweet about,” calling her criticism “inflammatory and fact-less and you know it.”
Some First Amendment experts, however, have expressed concern with the legislation, suggesting that it might run afoul of the Bill of Rights.
Gary Krupkin, a Richardson-based member of the First Amendment Lawyers Association, explained to The Dallas Express, “While it is laudable that Representative Jackson proposes legislation that would limit ‘hate speech,’ that type of often-heinous and divisive speech is protected by the 1st Amendment.”
“There are many 1st Amendment cases on which reasonable people can disagree with the Supreme Court, but it is nonetheless imperative in a democratic society to have a vigorous exchange of ideas,” Krupkin continued.
“The ‘marketplace of ideas,’ requires that the answer to hateful speech is more speech that will, hopefully, dissuade persons to abandon hateful speech.”
David Keating, the President of the Institute for Free Speech, told The Dallas Express, “fortunately, it’s not going to pass in this Congress. I think we can, we can bet the farm on that one.”
“But I mean, this bill is clearly unconstitutional,” the free speech advocate continued. “It goes against some of the most important and famous free speech cases including NAACP v. Claiborne Hardware Co. [1982].”
Giving an example, Keating suggested, “Suppose if you’re a journalist and you write something a news report, and that news report caused some nut to commit a crime because he didn’t like what was reported on.”
“The bill would deem you as having conspired with the person that committed the crime even though you have never met the person, never spoken to them, never corresponded with them, never had any communication with them at all,” he claimed.”
“That’s a really strange definition of a conspiracy,” Keating remarked. “It’s so flagrantly unconstitutional in what it is proposing.”
Similarly, Kevin Goldberg, a First Amendment Specialist at the Freedom Forum, agreed that “the bill attempts to criminalize perfectly legal speech.
“Though abhorrent, hate speech is protected by the First Amendment unless it involves a true threat against another person or incites others to commit imminent lawless violence.”
Rep. Jackson Lee has, so far, not addressed the First Amendment concerns some have with the bill, instead insisting that previous incidents demand that “white supremacy should be added to this law. Why? Because as Director Wray testified, it’s a major domestic terrorist threat.”
Who keeps voting for this racist idiot. And in Texas.
That’s easy. Other racists. People who think the government exists to support them through welfare and reparations. Texas as a whole may be conservative, but Austin, Dallas, and Houston are almost as Liberal as Los Angeles.
The voters of TX18. in and around Houston.
Which is worse?
1) Black person using their voice to call attention to white racism to “prevent” minority repression?
2) White person using their voice to call attention to Dallas mininority area crime-intolerant white racism, to “perpetuate” minority repression?
https://dallasexpress.com/opinion/opinion-the-racism-of-high-crime-rates/
The People’s Propoganda
Propaganda
Most likely ignorant blacks and liberals who want to prove they aren’t biased! This lazy “representative” didn’t even rewrite last year’s proposed bill, but just resubmitted it!
Does Ms Jackson not realize that passing such a bill, which violates the first amendment, would open the door to legislation that would criminalize activities in other groups that call for violence against whites, or straight people, or anti-abortion groups?
Ms Jackson is, herself, a racist, which should disqualify her for public office.
No evidence presented that she is a racist who should be disqualified from public office. Her bill may be extreme or unconstitutional but could be crafted to avoid those pitfalls. White racism has been tolerated in this country for too long and has spawned some black racism. Both need to be curbed, constitutionally.
Too vague, will be used against people with pale skin for everything, causing persecution. These people, Marxists want to get rid of people with white skin, the hatred is palpable.
et up with the DA
She is not a Marxist and being one does not imply wanting to get rid of people with white skin. These are hateful assertions without basis.
Lee is also a racist. If people remember just a short time ago she refused to get out of someone else’s seat on a plane because she was “Privileged” and “Entitled”. I’d like to propose that blacks that commit crimes against white, latino and Asian are able to file Leading Against Black Supremacy as well. Be Very Careful what you wish for Ms Lee, your actions Prove you’re a Racist.
That issue with the plane seat would have been hilarious if the seat belonged to another angry, self-serving black person. I would have liked a ringside seat for that conversation.
She’s been an active racist forever. I propose that all blacks that want to rid the country of whites be given a one way ticket to an all, or almost all, black country. A place where they’ll never have to face a white person again.
Just think how much less violence this country would have, if places like Chicago, Detroit, New York, east LA, San Francisco, were suddenly without the black population that believes they’re being discriminated against!
But are they not, in truth, being discriminated against? If saying so brings the penalty of deportation (of American citizens!) then their claims have some merit. We would never consider deporting whitw racists to Europe. Let us tone down the rgetoric.
This bill is criminalizing speech of those advocating for whites only. That’s racist. If it was balanced with equal force against other races like what BLM / Black Power express or La Raza, it might be considered something more than racist legislation.
Now I do think there should be a limit on what individuals are permitted to express. It’s ridiculous that people like George Soros can subvert our civil order with impunity and not be deported or banned like he has been in Hungary and Poland, Austrailia, Phillipines, Turkey, Pakistan, and Russia. Does the US need such open arms to welcome enemies of our Consititution and virtuous order?
Unless the commit a crime, such people who are American citizens must be welcome here. We need not look to models in Hungary,Poland,Philippines, Turkey, Pakistan, or Russia since they are all countries that have curtailed the frredom of their citizens in order to advance Nationalist ideologies.
Some of the most hate-filled people on this planet regularly show up at BLM or Antifa demonstrations. As expected, this bill wouldn’t do anything to curb their hate speech. Hate breeds hate, whereas open, and even “vigorous” speech is the only way to counter hateful ideas.
Lee just wants a platform where her opponents are silenced.
Lee-Jackson is a self-serving, self-promoting individual, who does not represent the people, unless they are blacks with their hands out!
The huge problem with this bill (besides being inane) is It’s too inclusive and is aimed only on a specific group of people, which in essence makes the bill racist. Non-white people should also not be able to slander or cause a conspiracy to end in a crime against white people. So her biased bill is already a blatant crime against the white population. So, therefore, if a black comedian gets up and makes jokes about how racist or ignorant white people are, they are inciting black people to be angry and hate white people and that should also be a crime. And am curious about people who have non-white in their ancestry. They may look white but have Native American or Hispanic in their family tree. So basically, she is judging by skin color. For any lawmaker to try and enact laws based on their own skin color is self-serving and should be disallowed. It is WE THE PEOPLE, not we the minority.
Isn’t that what white America been doing since they started making laws…laws that only benefit white America. Most of these comments are based on bias and hate. Everyone wants racism to end except for the people who benefit from it.
No it isn’t what white people have been doing it is what all people.have been doing just wasn’t until Darwin that we started to segregate people solely by their complexion. Everyone wants equality and we receive that when laws are administered to all equally regardless of victim or perpetrators’ race.
And does not give special concessions to people based solely on their skin color, gender identity or sexual preferences, or any other such nonsense.
The nonsense is what majority groups have been using to intimidate minorities for 200 years or more. Let’s stop it both ways and avoid damaging hate.
Hun, you really need to read up on history. England was no angel and still isn’t. Still lording that fairy tale royal crap and the people are too ignorant to get rid of that hogwash. That “blue blood” line is white, btw. If you think England never had slaves, you better think again. For many years, their household servants were nothing more than lowly paid slaves, treated like second class citizens…and they were white. The slums of England were full of the poor, living in filth and disease. African and Indian tribes warred with each other in the past. To take over territory or just because the others were not of their tribe…making them different. People are naturally conformists, following the crowd. If you had lived 200 years ago, I guarantee you, you would have followed step. Using present day knowledge to judge people from many years ago, who did NOT know what you now know, is beyond ignorant. You cannot change the past. We’re supposed to learn from history, not dwell on it.
Oh really? What was “Affirmative Action” designed to do? Any idea how many majority white men, had difficulty finding jobs they were well qualified for, and had experience in, because government provided tax incentives for employers to hire blacks with no experience, no aptitude for a job, who seldom were able to learn the job, or perform it without supervision, and often quit or got terminated after about 3 months! Now employers want bi-lingual employees to accommodate foreigners who won’t learn English!
Oh my! More claims of reverse discrimination. If there had never been any discrimination there would never have been any reverse discrimination. We need to evaluate which side of neutral we are right now to determine today’s policy imperatives. We do not need to denounce groups of people in order to put them down for imagined lack of competence. That is always the path toward exploitation without feeling guilty or rectifying the situation.
We have been trying to reduce, not increase this phenomenon for the last 60 years. That it is now rebounding due to MAGAotts and their extremist opponents is unfortunate and not to be encouraged.
This racist, Sheila Jackson Lee, needs get the Hell out of Congress where her bigotry continues to inflame black people. This racist has never done anything of value for her constituents in all her years in Congress however, she did travel to South Africa to a World conference on racism. While there she managed to get herself arrested for protesting against Sudan. Her net worth is over $5 million. Her hatred of white people is substantial!
Hell has nothing to do with any of this.
Does this article infer that “Critical Race Theory” teaching is protected by the 1st Amendment?
CRT is a theory formulated by past discrimination practices. It doesn’t take into consideration education, ability, intelligence, criminal history, or proof of accomplishments. If you look up average IQ by race, Asians rate the highest at an average of 120, whites are next at 100, and blacks come in at 80. This is not to say that there aren’t individual in each group that are geniuses and lower than what’s considered functioning intelligence, it’s an average.
BLM and La Raza get a pass? Right, only whites are racist.
Is it your opinion that whites are never racist? That is equally absurd. All are capable of racism if they refuse to think but emote based on group identity alone.
Dear SJ Lee: please retire and go away. We already have a constitution. Better to focus on the much more prevalent issue of Black racism and crime.
Not much more prevalent. Perhaps even less prevalent. The truth does not depend on our personal biases.
This woman is mentally ill. Not fit for public office.
Question. Why do we even have hate crimes? Is murder any worse when its done out of hate for the other skin color? I mean the person is still dead and the best sentence is the death penalty. Shouldn’t matter whats in your heart the crime is still the same crime.
Exactly. Have never heard of anyone killing someone because they liked them. So if blacks riot and kill white people, that’s not considered a hate crime? Unbelievable.