Bill Overview
Title: Emmett Till Antilynching Act
Description: This bill makes lynching a federal hate crime offense. Specifically, the bill imposes criminal penalties—a fine, a prison term of up to 30 years, or both—on an individual who conspires to commit a hate crime offense that results in death or serious bodily injury or that includes kidnapping or an attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill.
Sponsors: Rep. Rush, Bobby L. [D-IL-1]
Target Audience
Population: People affected by racial hate crimes
Estimated Size: 331000000
- Lynching has historically targeted specific racial groups, particularly African Americans in the United States, leading to its designation as a hate crime.
- The bill addresses a serious societal and historical issue in the U.S. regarding racial violence and hate crimes, indicating a wide social and moral impact.
- The entire U.S. population is indirectly impacted as this legislation attempts to rectify historical injustices and improve racial equality.
- African Americans and other minority communities are more directly impacted as this bill seeks to provide legal protection against hate crimes.
- Individuals or groups involved in civil rights, racial justice, and hate crime monitoring will also be directly impacted.
- The law aims to have a deterrent effect on hate crimes generally, therefore influencing behaviors and legal outcomes across the U.S.
- Statistical data indicates that hate crimes occur globally, therefore legal precedents like this may influence international hate crime legislation.
Reasoning
- The primary focus of the policy is on reducing hate crimes, specifically lynching, which has historically targeted African Americans. Therefore, this group and those connected to them, such as civil rights workers, are the most directly affected by the policy.
- The impact on individuals' self-reported wellbeing may vary based on their likelihood to experience or engage in civil rights issues or be targeted by hate crimes.
- Individuals not involved directly with these issues or living in areas less affected by racial tensions may experience a negligible impact from the enactment of this policy.
- Given the policy's target and scope, the budget limit suggests it aims to establish federal standards, with costs primarily focused on legal infrastructure and enforcement rather than direct financial support to impacted individuals.
Simulated Interviews
Civil Rights Activist (Atlanta, GA)
Age: 34 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This is a crucial step towards justice for our community.
- It increases my trust in the legal system to address racial violence.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 10 | 6 |
Lawyer (Los Angeles, CA)
Age: 45 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I believe this legislation will provide more tools to fight hate crimes.
- It can help prevent racially motivated violence in a legal framework.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Teacher (Houston, TX)
Age: 28 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We need laws like this to protect our kids and communities.
- It's important for creating a safer environment for everyone.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Journalist (Montgomery, AL)
Age: 52 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This law addresses a dark part of our history but it needs careful implementation.
- Public awareness and education are essential for its success.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
Software Engineer (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 40 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 8
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I appreciate the focus on justice but it doesn't directly impact my daily life.
- The tech industry doesn't face these issues directly.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 8 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 8 |
University Student (Chicago, IL)
Age: 21 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 4/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This law is a legal recognition of the atrocities our community faced.
- Improves my outlook on the legal changes towards racial equality.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 6 |
Retired (Jackson, MS)
Age: 63 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- It's good to see legal frameworks addressing hate crimes more robustly.
- I'm concerned about the law's reach and effectiveness.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Police Officer (Miami, FL)
Age: 39 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This law can help us in tackling racially-motivated crimes more effectively.
- Implementation will require thorough training and resources.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Business Owner (New York, NY)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Ensuring legal repercussions for hate crimes supports a safer business environment.
- It's an important step, though less direct on my personal business operations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Social Worker (Philadelphia, PA)
Age: 27 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Laws like these reinforce the protective environment I strive to create with my work.
- Hope this aids in deterring hate crimes against vulnerable populations.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 5 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $5000000 (Low: $2000000, High: $10000000)
Year 2: $6000000 (Low: $2500000, High: $12000000)
Year 3: $7000000 (Low: $3000000, High: $13000000)
Year 5: $8000000 (Low: $3500000, High: $14000000)
Year 10: $9000000 (Low: $4000000, High: $15000000)
Year 100: $10000000 (Low: $5000000, High: $18000000)
Key Considerations
- The cost of implementing the law, including law enforcement, prosecution, and incarceration, against the societal benefits.
- The historical and social significance of providing federal legal protection against lynching.
- The balance of deterrent effects versus increased litigious costs.