Race, Ethnicity and National Origin-Based Discrimination in Social Media and Hate Crimes across 100 U.S. Cities

Statistics reveal that hate crimes in the United States have increased for the past two years in a row. From 2014 to 2016, the number of reported hate crimes has increased from 5,479 in 2014, to 5,850 in 2015, to 6,121 in 2016. These numbers do not include crimes that were not shared with the FBI by local law enforcement, or crimes that were not reported to the police at all. Early indicators reveal that the number of hate crimes in 2017 is expected to further continue this upward trend. The current social and political climate has raised much concern regarding the reported increase in hate crimes, and the safety of persons who may be the targets of bias-motivated crime. One concern that has not received much attention in the scholarly literature or otherwise is the intersection of hate crimes and Stand Your Ground laws. Stand Your Ground laws remove the “duty to retreat” requirement in claims of self-defense, and permit a person to use any force necessary to protect oneself when in a public place that the person has a right to occupy. Empirical research on Stand Your Ground laws indicates that these laws contributed to an increase in homicide rates in states that offer Stand Your Ground as a legal defense, and that these laws have an implicit racial bias that affects the outcome of Stand Your Ground criminal cases. As written, these laws offer much subjectivity to the person employing the Stand Your Ground defense. This study examines the use of Stand Your Ground laws as a legal defense and suggests that, given the current social and political climate, these laws need to be modified to ensure that violence against others because of bias or prejudice cannot be translated into fear for one’s safety, and therefore, a justifiable defense for hate crimes.

The current study introduces a method to assess hate crime classification error in a state Incident-Based Reporting System. The study identifies and quantifies the “statistical accuracy” of aggregate hate crime data and provides insight from frontline officers about thought processes involved with classifying bias offenses. Random samples of records from two city and two county agencies provided data for the study. A systematic review of official case narratives determined hate crime classification error using state and federal definitions. A focus group sought to inquire about officers’ handling of hate crimes. Undercounting of hate crimes in official data was evident. When error rates were extrapolated, National Incident-Based Reporting System Group A hate crimes were undercounted by 67%. Officers’ responses validated complications involved with classifying hate crimes, particularly, incidents motivated “in part” by bias. Classification errors in reporting hate crimes have an impact on the statistical accuracy of official hate crime statistics. Officers’ offense descriptions provided greater awareness to issues with accurately interpreting and classifying hate crimes. The results yield useful information for officer training, understanding the true magnitude of these crimes, and a precursor for adjusting crime statistics to better estimate the “true” number of hate crimes in the population.

violation of the equality ideal. At most, this latter conception of bias crime statutes can assert that crimes based on the protected characteristics threaten the equality ideal because these characteristics have generally been the basis of past discrimination—but they cannot locate either the harm risked by the perpetrator or his individual culpability more precisely. 2. The Potential Underinclusiveness Problem This proposed solution to the overinclusiveness problem of bias crimes does not address the potential underinclusiveness question. Why, for example, are the elderly and the disabled typically not included within bias crime statutes? Formulating the list of protected characteristics that should be included within bias crimes statutes is a complex question without a single solution whose full elaboration is beyond the scope of this article. A few points, however, follow naturally from the above analysis. Clearly, political factors influence the calculation of the proper scope of bias crime laws, as debates over the inclusion of gender and sexual orientation as protected characteristics demonstrate. In response to political pressure, the scope of bias crimes has been rapidly increasing. This phenomenon threatens to seriously weaken bias crime laws. Legislative judgment about which characteristics are likely to make their bearers targets of violent discrimination helps sharpen the focus of bias crimes, feeding more clearly into the historical experience that justifies the penalty enhancement associated with these crimes. Having too many groups including within 149. See, e.g., Julie Goldscheid, Gender-Motivated Violence: Developing A Meaningful Paradigm for Civil Rights Enforcement, 22 Harv. Women’s L.J. 123 (1999). 150. Martin S. Zwerling, Legislating Against Hate in New York: Bias Crimes and the Lesbian and Gay Community, 11 Touro L. Rev. 529 (1995); Anthony S. Winer, Hate Crimes, Homosexuals, and the Constitution, 29 Harv. C.R.-C.L. L. Rev. 387 (1994). 151. Historical and contemporary social contexts suggest why certain aspects of peoples’ identity provoke a strong sense of solidarity with other members of the This content downloaded from 157.55.39.177 on Tue, 15 Nov 2016 03:56:32 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms DANNERMACRO 5/5/2003 4:42 PM 2002] CULPABILITY IN CONTEXT 447 the definition of bias crimes risks reducing the higher stigma associated with this kind of crime. Generally rejecting the expansion of bias crime statutes, however, does not resolve the question of which groups should properly be included within their reach. Whether gender should be considered a protected characteristic, for example, demonstrates the difficulty of the inquiry about which characteristics should be included and which should be excluded. Women have historically been subjected to discrimination in many facets of their lives, including voting and employment. Whether women are still subject to widespread discrimination is less obvious. The model of bias crime presented here focuses on the perpetrator’s choice of the victim as a representative of a group of which he is a member. The victim’s group affiliation has more importance than any individual characteristics of the victim; indeed, this is what distinguishes bias crimes from general vulnerable victim statutes. Thus, some crimes typically committed against women, like acquaintance rape, fit uncomfortably within the bias crimes model. The question of whether gender group. For these reasons, vulnerability can and should be seen as especially salient along the dimensions of the protected characteristics currently articulated in existing bias crimes. Thus, I believe that Kenneth Simons’s response to Harel & Parchomovsky’s article is misguided. See Simons, supra note 21, at 241 (arguing that race, religion, and the other characteristics protected by bias crimes are less important predictors of victims’ vulnerability due to other factors, like “geography, wealth, class, and similar factors”). Vulnerability generally might be more dependent on the factors that Simon mentions, but these characteristics are less likely to constitute the basis of widespread harm to other members of the “group,” precisely because the relevant characteristics are less salient to their members. 152. Cf. William A. Schabas, Genocide in International Law 114 (2000) (arguing for a narrow definition of the crime of genocide: “for society to define a crime so heinous that it will occur only rarely is testimony to the value of such a precise formulation. Diluting the definition, either by formal amendment or its terms or by extravagant interpretation of the existing text, risks trivializing the horror of the real crime when it is committed”). 153. Perhaps the problem can be resolved through the statutory formulation of bias crimes. In a bias crime, the perpetrator must select the victim in at least substantial part because of his or her membership in a protected group. The acquaintance rapist might not primarily select his victim because she is a woman but instead because of some other characteristic. If that characteristic is not This content downloaded from 157.55.39.177 on Tue, 15 Nov 2016 03:56:32 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms DANNERMACRO 5/5/2003 4:42 PM 448 BUFFALO CRIMINAL LAW REVIEW [Vol. 6:389 should be included in bias crimes statutes should turn on the pervasiveness of discrimination against women, and how many of the crimes committed against women reflect perpetration because of their identity as women, rather than other factors less central to the purpose of bias crime statutes. The discussion of bias crimes in this article also provides legislators with other criteria they might use when evaluating the propriety of expanding the scope of characteristics protected by bias crimes. History is clearly an important factor. Has the characteristic historically been the basis for discrimination? Race, ethnicity, national origin, and religion easily qualify here, as would sexual orientation. Contemporary circumstances must also be considered. Prejudices that were vivid hundreds of years ago but have no contemporary currency clearly should not be included within these statutes. Legislators should also consider the particular characteristics of discrimination within their jurisdiction. Some groups, one could imagine, would be likely targets of discrimination across the United States and thus would be included in all bias crime statutes, while others might be particularly vulnerable only in particular regions. specifically included within the reach of the bias crime statute, the acquaintance rape should not be considered a bias crime. Even assuming, however, that the “because of” formula helps distinguish between crimes that fit within the bias crimes model and those that do not, this resolution does not identify which characteristics should be included within the statute generally. 154. Cf. United States v. McCall, 174 F.3d 47, 50 (2d Cir. 1998) (construing the federal vulnerable victim enhancement and stating “broad generalizations about victims based upon their membership in a class are disfavored where a very substantial portion of the class is not in fact particularly vulnerable to the crime in question. In such cases, courts have required that the enhancement be based on individualized findings as to the vulnerability of particular victims”). While individualized findings as to particular victims would not be appropriate for bias crimes statutes because of the relative importance of the group over the individual, considering the proportion of crimes committed against members of a group that are likely to be considered bias crimes might prove a useful way of determining whether or not the characteristic should be included within the bias crime statute. 155. Gays and lesbians, for example, might fit this description. See Herek, supra note 14, at 945 (noting that “sexual prejudice is still acceptable in many quarters of American society”). I imagine that African Americans, Latinos, and other minority racial groups would also likely be considered vulnerable groups This content downloaded from 157.55.39.177 on Tue, 15 Nov 2016 03:56:32 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms DANNERMACRO 5/5/2003 4:42 PM 2002] CULPABILITY IN CONTEXT 449 Legislators also might consider whether the characteristic is likely to make the victims subject to attack because of social discrimination against this group or because it is a proxy for some other quality, such as physical helplessness. This type of inquiry makes some characteristics, like age and disability, problematic for inclusion within the reach of bias crime statutes. While crimes against the elderly should certainly be seen as crimes targeting vulnerable victims, they should not be defined as bias crimes. Discrimination—not opportunism— is the foundation of the bias crime perpetrator’s culpability. If one believes, as I do, that the category of bias crimes should be narrow, inevitably groups that resemble those already included within the reach of bias crime statues will feel unfairly excluded. As Jacobs and Potter point out in their comprehensive critique of bias crimes, the judgment about the proper scope of these statutes is inescapably political. While the legislative crafting of bias crime statutes should be informed by clear questions and criteria, the difficulty of the inquiry is unavoidable.

Hate/bias crime against racial/ethnic minorities in the United States: A systematic review of empirical research and assessment of next steps

Since 2012, the United Kingdom government has annually published data relating to the number of hate crimes recorded by police forces across England and Wales. Over the past half-decade, the number of hate crimes has increased year on year and are currently at record levels. Some have referred to this as a crisis. This article seeks to investigate the drivers and causes for this, to try and better understand what hate crime looks like in the UK today. First, this article considers and contextualises what is currently known about hate crime in the UK. Having identifi ed some correlations, it explores the relationship between increases in hate crime numbers and the UK’s withdrawal from the European Union (Brexit), terror attacks, COVID-19 and Black Lives Matter. In trying to explain these relationships, Perry’s ‘permission to hate’ model is used. In conclusion, this article argues that while hate crime numbers are currently at record levels it is highly likely that they will continue to increase for at least the foreseeable future. A timely and contemporarily salient study, this article puts forward new thinking about hate crime in the UK and the correlation that is clearly evident with occurrences that take place in the country’s socio-political spaces.

BackgroundThe perceived threat of a contagious virus may lead people to be distrustful of immigrants and out-groups. Since the COVID-19 outbreak, the salient politicized discourses of blaming Chinese people for spreading the virus have fueled over 2000 reports of anti-Asian racial incidents and hate crimes in the United States.ObjectiveThe study aims to investigate the relationships between news consumption, trust, intergroup contact, and prejudicial attitudes toward Asians and Asian Americans residing in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. We compare how traditional news, social media use, and biased news exposure cultivate racial attitudes, and the moderating role of media use and trust on prejudice against Asians is examined.MethodsA cross-sectional study was completed in May 2020. A total of 430 US adults (mean age 36.75, SD 11.49 years; n=258, 60% male) participated in an online survey through Amazon’s Mechanical Turk platform. Respondents answered questions related to traditional news exposure, social media use, perceived trust, and their top three news channels for staying informed about the novel coronavirus. In addition, intergroup contact and racial attitudes toward Asians were assessed. We performed hierarchical regression analyses to test the associations. Moderation effects were estimated using simple slopes testing with a 95% bootstrap confidence interval approach.ResultsParticipants who identified as conservatives (β=.08, P=.02), had a personal infection history (β=.10, P=.004), and interacted with Asian people frequently in their daily lives (β=.46, P<.001) reported more negative attitudes toward Asians after controlling for sociodemographic variables. Relying more on traditional news media (β=.08, P=.04) and higher levels of trust in social media (β=.13, P=.007) were positively associated with prejudice against Asians. In contrast, consuming news from left-leaning outlets (β=–.15, P=.001) and neutral outlets (β=–.13, P=.003) was linked to less prejudicial attitudes toward Asians. Among those who had high trust in social media, exposure had a negative relationship with prejudice. At high levels of trust in digital websites and apps, frequent use was related to less unfavorable attitudes toward Asians.ConclusionsExperiencing racial prejudice among the Asian population during a challenging pandemic can cause poor psychological outcomes and exacerbate health disparities. The results suggest that conservative ideology, personal infection history, frequency of intergroup contact, traditional news exposure, and trust in social media emerge as positive predictors of prejudice against Asians and Asian Americans, whereas people who get COVID-19 news from left-leaning and balanced outlets show less prejudice. For those who have more trust in social media and digital news, frequent use of these two sources is associated with lower levels of prejudice. Our findings highlight the need to reshape traditional news discourses and use social media and mobile news apps to develop credible messages for combating racial prejudice against Asians.

Addressing racial and ethnic tensions in the United States is a critical issue that requires multifaceted approaches. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) strategies offer a promising avenue for managing and reducing these conflicts by fostering dialogue, understanding, and cooperative problem-solving among diverse groups. ADR mechanisms such as mediation, arbitration, and negotiation provide neutral platforms for addressing deeply rooted racial and ethnic tensions in a constructive manner, emphasizing collaboration over confrontation. These strategies aim to bridge gaps in communication, build trust, and promote reconciliation by engaging stakeholders from various communities in open, respectful discussions. Mediation, as one of the key ADR methods, allows for the involvement of a neutral third party to facilitate conversations and identify mutually acceptable solutions. It is particularly effective in addressing issues of racial and ethnic discrimination, police-community relations, and institutional biases, where trust and open communication are essential for progress. Restorative justice, another ADR approach, focuses on healing and repairing the harm caused by racial or ethnic conflicts, encouraging offenders to take responsibility while empowering victims to voice their experiences. However, the effectiveness of ADR in addressing racial and ethnic tensions depends on cultural sensitivity and the inclusion of minority voices in the process. ADR practitioners must be trained to recognize power imbalances and systemic inequalities that could influence the resolution process. Furthermore, community involvement and continuous dialogue are vital in ensuring long-term success and sustained peace. This abstract highlights the potential of ADR strategies in addressing racial and ethnic tensions in the USA, emphasizing the need for culturally attuned practices and inclusive dialogue. By prioritizing collaboration and understanding, ADR can play a significant role in mitigating racial and ethnic conflicts, promoting social cohesion, and fostering a more just and equitable society.

Research suggests there has been a rise in the number of hate crimes since 1985. At the same time, legislatures at the local, state, and national level have enacted policies that both track and regulate hate crime. This article is an effort to determine the factors influencing hate crime policy and implementation efforts. The project is divided into three sections: In the first section, the characteristics and extent of hate crime are discussed. Section two describes hate crime policy as social regulatory policy and uses this theoretical framework to explain state variation in laws con cerning hate crimes. In section three, I present a model of policy imple mentation to predict state implementation efforts of federal hate crime policy Based on the variables suggested by these theoretical frameworks, I present hypotheses and conduct a multiple regression analysis using a fifty-state data set. The results indicate hate crime policies and imple mentation efforts are largely attempts by politicians to satisfy organized interests in competitive political systems. I discuss the implications of these findings and suggest avenues for future research.

The Long-Run Effect of 9/11: Terrorism, Backlash, and the Assimilation of Muslim Immigrants in the West

Asian and Asian American populations in the United States represent the fastest-growing group, with an 81% increase between 2000 and 2019. During the COVID-19 pandemic, they were targeted by anti-Asian racism, leading to experiences of discrimination, stigmatization, verbal harassment, and physical attacks. The purpose of this study was to conduct a systematic literature review to understand how anti-Asian sentiment, particularly through social media, affected the mental health of Asian populations. We established six key areas as eligibility criteria: (1) Asian populations, (2) the COVID-19 pandemic, (3) racism and discrimination, (4) mental health, (5) the role of social media, and (6) the United States. Using five online databases—PubMed, Web of Science, CINAHL, ScienceDirect, and OpenGrey—we applied the PRISMA 2020 flow diagram, which resulted in 15 articles for review. A total of four themes emerged. First, during the COVID-19 pandemic, Asian and Asian American populations experienced high rates of racial prejudice and discrimination, which were widely discussed on social media. Second, there was no geographic pattern distinguishing rural and urban areas in terms of anti-Asian hate incidents. Third, prejudice and discrimination had a negative impact on mental health. Lastly, social media served as both a platform for spreading and combating anti-Asian hate crimes. Future studies should examine how social media particularly influences offline hate crimes and explore culturally tailored interventions to reduce racism and discrimination among Asian and Asian American populations, ultimately promoting community resilience.

COVID-19, originally reported in China, has brought an increase in anti-Asian and Asian American hate incidents and crimes in the United States. However, research on hate incidents and crimes are relatively new in the field of geography. To provide better ways to investigate hate crime incidents against Asians and Asian Americans during COVID-19, this article draws on various research methods from existing studies on hate crimes. Geographers have focused attention on minority groups linked to different geographic scales, and non-geographic studies have focused mainly on psychological symptoms and impacts on health. Even though existing studies have helped broaden the knowledge of the subject, the geographic aspects of the issue require further examination. This article suggests that geographers should pay more attention to four aspects of research in hate crimes and incidents for future research: avoiding oversimplified concepts, reconsidering relational aspects within the local community, identifying intersectionality and everydayness of people, and engaging more with the practice of the law enforcement and the local communities.

Teaching and Learning Guide for: Isn’t Every Crime a Hate Crime? The Case for Hate Crime Laws

What's Important: Addressing Anti-Asian Discrimination and Violence in the Age of COVID-19.

Presidential elections are often accompanied by various phenomena, including hate crimes that persist even after the elections have concluded. This phenomenon has not yet been thoroughly studied through social media analysis. In response to the gaps in previous research, this study focuses on sentiment analysis on social media, the forms of hate crime, and their contributing factors. The study presents three key findings related to hate crimes following the 2024 presidential election in Indonesia. First, Ganjar Pranowo received the least negative sentiment, followed by Anies Baswedan and Prabowo Subianto. Second, hate crimes directed at presidential candidates took the form of ethnic-based sentiment, anti-religion hatred, and threats of violence. Third, factors influencing the emergence of hate crimes post-election include the influence of social media popularity, sponsorship by electoral actors, weak enforcement of campaign violations, and the history of political and ethno communal violence. The study also emphasizes the need for future research to examine post-election hate crimes by integrating multidisciplinary approaches on social media. This would enrich the data and provide more comprehensive knowledge about hate crime phenomena and other forms of digital crime arising from the electoral process.

The COVID-19 pandemic has changed the way people communicate, live, socialize and perhaps the way they feel about the Asian population. The United States has seen a rise in the Asian hate crimes on online and offline platforms since the beginning of the pandemic which has affected the overall well-being of the Asian population. To our knowledge, the present study is one of the first studies to address the effects of COVID 19-related online perceived racial discrimination on the self-esteem of Asians. Additional objectives were to reveal the different coping mechanisms being used by the Asian population to cope with self-esteem issues and to tease apart any differences in the coping mechanisms used by the low self-esteem and high self-esteem groups. Out of the 510 participants who were sent the survey via Lucid, 506 participants answered questions about their social media use, online perceived racial discrimination, self-esteem, and coping mechanisms. Using correlations, qualitative content analysis and chi-square test, the findings revealed that increased use of social media led to increase in online perceived racial discrimination. The study also identified 9 categories of coping mechanisms used to cope with self-esteem issues and identified that people in low self-esteem group were not as motivated as the high self-esteem group people to use coping strategies. This study aimed to make a positive contribution to the scant literature on COVID 19-related online racial discrimination and its effects on self-esteem. We believe my findings can make educators and policy makers aware of the situation and formulate policies and solutions that address online racial discrimination and self-esteem issues, especially among Asian population.