LGBT hate-crimes bill still a no-go

By Jen Colletta
PGN Staff Writer
© 2008 Philadelphia Gay News

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court voted unanimously July 23 to uphold a lower-court ruling that struck language protecting the LGBT community from the state’s hate-crimes legislation.

The hate-crimes amendment was included in a 2002 agricultural-vandalism bill and added sexual orientation, gender identity, gender, ancestry and mental and physical disability as protected classes in the state’s Ethnic Intimidation Act.

The Pennsylvania State Police reported 18 bias-motivated crimes against LGBT people in the commonwealth in 2006, but Stacey Sobel, executive director of Equality Advocates Pennsylvania, maintained that number could be much higher.

“This is just a small snapshot of the victims of hate crimes,” she said. “It’s well known that many LGBT people who are victims of hate crimes don’t come forward because they’re unsure how they will be treated by law enforcement.”

The legislation that sought to protect the LGBT community and other minority groups has been tangled up in court for several years.

In 2005, Michael Marcavage, founder of the anti-gay Christian group Repent America, filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the legislative process by which the amendment was included.

Marcavage cited Article III of the Pennsylvania Constitution, which prohibits the legislature from amending a bill if it would change the original purpose of the legislation.

The Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court concurred with Marcavage and ruled Nov. 15, 2007, in a 4-1 vote, that the legislature unlawfully included the amendment in the bill, which was originally intended to prevent crop destruction, making it “unconstitutional and therefore null and void.”

The Supreme Court’s upholding of this ruling has dealt a blow to local individuals and organizations who invested a great deal of time and energy fighting for the passage of the hate-crimes amendment.

“We are extremely disappointed that some of the most vulnerable people in Pennsylvania are now unprotected by our state’s hate-crimes law,” Sobel said.

Chuck Ardo, spokesperson for Gov. Rendell, expressed the governor’s dissatisfaction with the state Supreme Court ruling.

“Removing protections from any class of people does not seem to fit any categories of equal protection,” Ardo said.

Marcavage hailed the recent ruling as a “victory for constitutional government.”

“Having been arrested, jailed and charged with a hate crime for preaching the Gospel, I am elated that the Pennsylvania Supreme Court upheld the lower court’s ruling in striking down Pennsylvania’s expanded hate-crimes law,” Marcavage said, referring to his October 2004 arrest during OutFest, in which he and 10 other Repent America members were arrested and charged with hate crimes for disrupting the event. The charges were later dropped.

Marcavage claimed the hate-crimes measure was an attempt by legislators to squelch religious freedoms.

“The methods used by the Pennsylvania legislature in passing the hate-crimes bill were extremely devious and yet another chilling example as to how far politicians are willing to go to silence Christian speech that they would violate our own state constitution to do it,” he said. “We should not be making special types of laws for certain groups of people; that’s just blatantly unconstitutional and just outrageous. We’re very much in opposition to any proposed hate-crimes law that gives special protections to certain people.”

Stephen Glassman, chair of the Pennsylvania Human Relations Commission, said he and other LGBT activists will commit themselves to seeing the measure passed again.

“We will continue to work with the legislature to pass amendments to the existing Ethnic Intimidation Act, which will mirror the language of the bill which was overturned by the Commonwealth Court on a technicality,” Glassman said. “It is vitally important for our agency to be able to respond to every act of hate and bias in the commonwealth, no matter who the victim may be. We must protect the rights of people to be free from these hate crimes just as surely as we protect them on the basis of their religion, race, ethnicity or national origin.”

Sobel said she’s eager for the legislature to take “swift action” and is optimistic that the bill will again be adopted.

“This legislation was passed with bipartisan support in both the House and Senate. It received two-thirds of both Republicans’ and Democrats’ votes and was signed by a Republican governor,” she said. “There’s no reason this legislation should not be advanced now, passed and signed into law as quickly as possible. We want them to do it right and ensure that these hate-crimes protections remain on the books.”

Jen Colletta can be reached at jen@epgn.com.