Emmett Till Anti-Lynching Act

"Although no legislation will reverse the pain and fear felt by those victims, their loved ones, and Black communities, this legislation is a necessary step America must take to heal from the racialized violence that has permeated its history," [Senator] Booker said.

We have a federal anti-lynching law (final when President Biden signs it) after over one hundred years of trying. The basic purpose of this law is the "message" it sends. Sen. Rand Paul held up this "good-intentioned but symbolic bill," but ultimately the will of the majority prevailed.

Three Republican members of the House voted against the bill.  They voiced libertarian concerns that some will disdain as covering racism.  We should let local governments handle these crimes.  A "hate" law is really a free speech issue.  It doesn't just cover race, but things like gender identity. And, as Rand Paul worried about, maybe it will be applied too broadly.

I sorta respect that sort of thing.  I looked at the text (it's brief) and basically it appears to be about (1) the name (2) increasing the punishment of the applied offenses from ten years to thirty.  The name  is "lynching," but the text goes to an existing law that talks about a certain degree of bodily injury.  It is not specifically about "lynching" per se. 

One discussion notes that the bill is broader than another version.  Again, from what I can tell, it piggybacks on the existing federal hate crime law.  The issue, and this is far from trivial obviously, is the MESSAGE.  

After so long, with an infamous history of the federal government blocking a means to address local racist violence (a badge and incident of slavery as well as often done with government involvement or at least negligence), a federal anti-lynching bill has been passed.  The increased penalty sends a message as well.  This is a BFD and we really care about it.

The message aside, people can reasonably be wary though one might not trust the good faith of these three.  Today, what is the need of another federal law like this?  It is after all not just a resolution; it changes the criminal law.  When will a locality not punish in a case today?  And, given the possibility that would occur, when does the federal hate crime not apply?  Finding a federal hook (when such a federal prosecution is warranted) would not be hard in nearly any actual case.  

You will likely have double dipping in major cases too.  State and federal prosecution is not "double jeopardy" as a constitutional matter.  At least as currently understood.  It still is somewhat concerning.  There is something to be said with making existing hate crime comprehensive (such as applies it to GLBTQ).  This isn't even that. 

What is the need for something that can be up to thirty years of prison?  Existing law, especially with people liable to be guilty of multiple counts, have ways to sentence people to rot in prison for a long, long time.  The asshole (Paul) has a point there are better ways to address the problems of racism.  Including things like addressing immunity.  

Granting that, I think it is okay to vote for this sort of thing, even if you otherwise would on principle find extending federal law/punishment a problematic matter.  Sometimes, messages matter, or at least, are reasonable uses of governmental power.  

And, I doubt this will make things worse on a criminal justice level.  The gratuitous nature of the additional penalty goes both ways in that respect.   I do wish they would have left out that thirty year bit.  Thirty years is just too long.  It isn't mandatory or anything, but it is just too long.  The enrolled text also doesn't have the "whereas" history stuff I would expect either.  

If this is a message bill, we need to use it to inform people of that history.  And, very well, there are substantive reforms that should be passed besides this.  This is an easy message thing.  Well, it taking this long to pass suggests it is not TOTALLY easy, but okay.  There is harder things, including police reforms, even if (like the postal bill that passed) the result is more watered down than many people would like.

So, celebrate and continue fighting.