The Connecticut Hate Crimes Advisory Council and Governor Ned Lamont have proposed a bill to simplify and strengthen the state’s hate crimes statutes. UConn Law professors Sachin Pandya and Richard A. Wilson took lead roles in drafting the statute.
Currently, there are 20 separate hate crime statutes created over a 100-year period. This has created confusion as the statutes differ on what is covered and who is protected, as well as what hate crimes were covered by which statute. The new bill aims for consistency to make the law clear.
“The proposal puts all the hate crimes in one place in the criminal code,” Pandya said at a news conference held by the governor. “That makes it easier for police to find them. It makes them more consistent in what they require and who they protect. That makes the law easier to understand and enforce. It adds hate crime penalty enhancements for crimes involving physical injury or property damage, including for murder, arson, and other more serious crimes.”
The reform process began in 2021, when the council was created. It helped establish the Hate Crime Investigative Unit in the state police and then developed a hate crime reporting form for police, the first of its kind in the country.
“Then it became apparent that there were flaws with the hate crime statutes,” Wilson said. “There are 20 of them, and none are called ‘hate crime.’ They only cover minor felonies and do not specifically sanction bias-motivated murder or arson or other serious crimes. The statutes list different protected groups and they have different intent requirements. The list of flaws goes on; they’re a mess. They are outdated and inadequate to the task of protecting Connecticut’s citizens from hate crime, in a context where the willingness of the federal government to prosecute hate crime is uncertain.”
Wilson, who has been a member of the Hate Crimes Advisory Council since its inception, recruited Pandya to work on a new statute. Together, they visited every courthouse in the state and interviewed 72 police officers, prosecutors, judges, public defenders, and community groups in Connecticut as well as New York. They found a widespread consensus that the statutes were not workable.
Pandya drafted a new statute that brought all the 20 statutes into a single chapter and addressed the glaring inconsistencies. He and Wilson met with stakeholders on the council and throughout the state to discuss the draft and made adjustments based on the feedback, keeping consolidation as the main objective.
Wilson called the effort a “labor of love.”
In addition to consolidating all the hate crime statutes into one statute, the proposed bill authorizes the attorney general to investigate and bring civil actions on behalf of victims and authorizes judges to order participation in anti-bias programs for someone convicted of any hate crime. Previously only some of the statutes allowed for those actions.
While Pandya and Wilson led the efforts to draft the bill, bringing it to the legislature has been an effort from the whole Hate Crimes Advisory Council and is now a governor’s bill. It has support from many government agencies and community organizations across the state. It also has many ties to UConn.
Council co-chairs Douglas S. Lavine ’77 and Amy Lin Meyerson ’94 are law school alumni, and Meyerson is an adjunct professor currently leading the school’s Transactional Law Clinic. Council members Michelle Querijero ’08 and Ken Barone, who led the creation of the reporting form, are also connected to the university – Querijero as a law alumna and Barone as Associate Director of the Institute for Municipal and Regional Policy at the School of Public Policy.
Querijero has taken the lead in creating a new statewide hate crimes reporting portal (reporthate.ct.gov) available to the public.
“Hate crimes are vastly and systemically underreported, and for that reason the council determined that we needed to put together a public-facing reporting portal by which the public could report these hate crimes,” Querijero said at the news conference.
The next step for the new bill will be a public hearing before it is voted on later in the legislative session.
“When you hear from the [Anti-Defamation League], when you see the news, when you see that racist language out there, it’s a crime against that individual,” Lamont said at the news conference. “It’s also a dog whistle to others to commit similar type crimes. And that’s why we take this with the utmost seriousness. That’s why we treat it differently than just an individual crime. And this is why every day we want to make it easier for you to report this, easier for us to be able to enforce it, and make sure people know we’re here fighting for you.”
