Hate Crimes on Campus: The Problem and Efforts To Confront It

HATE CRIMES ON CAMPUS

THE P

ROBLEM AND

EFFORTS T

O CONFRONT IT

H ATE C RIMES S ERIES

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

Bureau of Justice Assistance

HATE CRIMES ON CAMPUS

THE PROBLEM AND

EFFORTS TO CONFRONT IT

Monograph

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

810 Seventh Street NW.

Washington, DC 20531

John Ashcroft

Attorney General

Deborah J. Daniels

Assistant Attorney General

Richard R. Nedelkoff

Director, Bureau of Justice Assistance

Office of Justice Programs

World Wide Web Home Page

www.ojp.usdoj.gov

Bureau of Justice Assistance

World Wide Web Home Page

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

For grant and funding information contact

U.S. Department of Justice Response Center

1–800–421–6770

This project was supported by Cooperative Agreement No. 95–DD–BX–K001, awarded

by the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of

Justice, to Community Research Associates, Inc. This document was prepared by the

Center for the Prevention of Hate Violence, University of Southern Maine, under con-

tract with Community Research Associates, Inc. The opinions, findings, and conclusions

or recommendations expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not

necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

The Bureau of Justice Assistance is a component of the Office of Justice Programs, which also

includes the Bureau of Justice Statistics, the National Institute of Justice, the Office of Juvenile Justice

and Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for Victims of Crime.

HATE CRIMES ON C

AMPUS

THE PROBLEM AND

EFFORTS TO CONFRONT IT

October 2001

NCJ 187249

Prepared by Stephen Wessler, Director

and Margaret Moss, Assistant Director

Center for the Prevention of Hate Violence

University of Southern Maine

iii

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

Contents

I. Introduction. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

II. Hate Crimes and Bias Incidents on Campus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Hate Crimes on Campus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Bias Incidents on Campus: The Prevalence and Impact of

Prejudice and Harassment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

III. Response to Campus Hate Crimes and Bias Incidents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Problem 1: Campus Police Officers Need Adequate Training . . . . 7

Problem 2: Hate Crimes and Serious Bias Incidents

Are Not Reported. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Problem 3: Police Do Not Report Hate Crimes to Campus

Administrators. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Problem 4: Students, Staff, and Faculty Do Not Report

Incidents Up the Administrative Ladder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Problem 5: Administrators Do Not Disseminate Information

to the Campus Community. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

IV. Promising Efforts: Responding to and Preventing Hate Crimes. . . . . 11

Campuswide Response to Hate Crimes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Hate Crimes Awareness and Prevention Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Combating Prejudice and Hate on Campus: A National

Student Colloquium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Anti-Defamation League . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Peer Diversity Education . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12

Campus Civility Project . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

V. Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

HATE CRIMES ON CAMPUS

VI. Appendix: Commonly Asked Questions About Hate Crimes

and Bias Incidents. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

VII. For More Information. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

When a hate crime occurs on a

college campus, the ideal of a uni-

versity as a place for learning and

growth is ruptured. Bias-motivated

violence or threats targeting stu-

dents, staff, or faculty not only

impair the educational mission of

an institution of higher learning

but also deprive young men and

women of the chance to live and

learn in an atmosphere free of fear

and intimidation. No college cam-

pus is immune to the risk of hate

violence. In the past 5 years alone,

the U.S. Department of Justice has

brought criminal civil rights actions

against students attending institu-

tions ranging from small liberal arts

colleges in Massachusetts and

Georgia to large state universities

in Florida and California.

This monograph examines four

aspects of the problem of bias,

prejudice, and hate crimes on our

college and university campuses.

First, the monograph examines the

prevalence of hate crimes on cam-

puses, who is targeted, what kinds

of crime are committed, and the fre-

quency and impact of bias incidents.

Second, the monograph identifies

common problems college commu-

nities have experienced in respond-

ing to hate crimes and provides

recommendations for prompt, effec-

tive, and appropriate responses.

Third, the monograph describes sev-

eral promising efforts to respond to

campus hate crimes and implement

prevention programs. Finally, the

monograph explains the difference

between hate crimes and bias inci-

dents and discusses the factors

police consider to determine

whether a hate crime has been

committed.

I. Introduction

Hate Crimes on Campus

Federal and State Enforcement

Activity

Hate crimes on campuses involve

a range of criminal conduct from

threats to bombings to violent phys-

ical assaults. They occur at virtually

every type of college and university

and in every part of the nation. Per-

petrators of these incidents include

current and former students and

nonstudents. Listed below is a sam-

pling of recent federal and state

enforcement actions involving bias-

motivated violence and threats on

campuses.

United States v. Samar. James

Samar, a college student, was in-

dicted on three counts of using

threats of force to interfere with the

federally protected rights of three

students attending a small Massa-

chusetts college. Samar used anti-

Semitic slurs, threatened two fellow

students, and threatened to kill one

fellow student. In addition, he deliv-

ered photographs of holocaust vic-

tims to one student and stated,

among other things, that the pho-

tographs were “a reminder of what

happened to your relatives because

they too made a mockery of Chris-

tianity.” Samar entered a plea

agreement.

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

II. Hate Crimes and Bias Incidents

on Campus

United States v. Machado. A for-

mer student was convicted of dis-

seminating an e-mail containing

racially derogatory comments and

threats to 59 college students,

nearly all of whom were of Asian

descent.

State v. Tozier. A student at a

small college in Maine yelled anti-

gay slurs and threats at a fellow

student who was working in a stu-

dent lounge and, in three consecu-

tive attacks, violently choked the

student. The defendant signed a

consent decree in a civil rights case

brought by Maine’s attorney general.

United States v. Lombardi. A

nonstudent was charged with deto-

nating two pipe bombs on the cam-

pus of a primarily African-American

public university in Florida. After

each of the bombings, violent racist

telephone calls were made to the

local television station.

State v. Masotta. Three white stu-

dents at a university in Maine left an

anonymous racist and threatening

message on an African-American

student’s answering machine. The

message ended with the following:

I wonder what you’re gonna look

like dead? Dead. I wonder if

when you die you’ll lose your

color. Like the blood starts to

HATE CRIMES ON CAMPUS

leave your body and you’re

gonna . . . start deteriorating

and blood starts to leave your

skin. . . . You get the picture?

You’re *** dead.

The defendants signed consent

orders in a civil rights case brought

by Maine’s attorney general.

United States v. Little. The defen-

dant, Robert Allen Little, was charged

with igniting a homemade pipe bomb

in the dorm room of two African-

American students on a small cam-

pus in Utah. The letters “KKK” were

painted in red fingernail polish on

the bomb’s firing device. The bomb

caused extensive damage to the

building and destroyed the belong-

ings of both students. After the

bombing, Little returned to the

dorm and left a threatening and

racist note on the door of another

African-American student. Little

was sentenced to 12 years in prison,

fined $12,000, and ordered to pay

restitution.

Campus Hate Crime Statistics

The available data on the preva-

lence of hate crimes and bias inci-

dents on college campuses are not

comprehensive, because they are

based on information from relatively

few reporting campuses. Three pri-

mary sources of data are the Fed-

eral Bureau of Investigation (FBI)

Uniform Crime Reports on hate

crime statistics, the U.S. Depart-

ment of Education Campus Security

Statistics, and the International

Association of College Law

Enforcement Administrators (IACLEA)

annual survey on campus crime

statistics.

U.S. Department of Education

data are collected pursuant to the

Clery Act (20 U.S.C. § 1092(f)),

which was enacted in 1992. This act

requires colleges and universities

across the nation to report campus

crimes and security policies to both

the campus community and the U.S.

Department of Education. In addi-

tion to policy and reporting require-

ments, it specifies that schools must

report separately those crimes that

appear to have been motivated by

prejudice. The U.S. Department of

Education is currently working with

colleges and universities to ensure

that Clery Act data are complete

and current.

Even statistics based on a rela-

tively small number of reporting

schools indicate that hate crimes

on campus are a significant prob-

lem. Moreover, there are strong rea-

sons to believe that the problem of

hate crimes is more widespread

than any statistics are likely to

reveal. First, many students, faculty,

and staff members are unsure of

what to report, when to report an

incident, and to whom they should

report an incident. Second, and per-

haps most important, victims of

hate crimes often are reluctant to

come forward because they feel iso-

lated and fear the potential reper-

cussions of a perpetrator. Gay and

lesbian victims who attend schools

in states that do not have laws pro-

tecting individuals from job or

employment discrimination based

on sexual orientation may fear that

reporting a hate crime will place

them at risk of further discrimina-

tion. For these and other reasons,

reliable statistics regarding on-campus

hate crimes are elusive.

As noted above, the FBI annual

compilation of hate crime statistics

and IACLEA annual survey of

crimes on campuses are based on

data from a relatively small number

of reporting institutions. The limited

number of reporting institutions and

the varied survey instruments also

account for a disparity in the results

of the two surveys. Both reports

indicate, however, that many

schools experience hate violence.

The Federal Bureau of Investiga-

tion Uniform Crime Report on hate

crime statistics. The FBI report on

1998 hate crime statistics is based

on reports from 450 colleges and

universities from 40 states. Of these

universities, 222 reported 241 inci-

dents of hate crime during the year.

The FBI data indicate that 57 per-

cent of hate crimes were motivated

by race, 18 percent were motivated

by anti-Semitism, and 16 percent

were motivated by bias based on

sexual orientation.

The International Association of

College Law Enforcement Adminis-

trators survey. The IACLEA report

for 1998 surveyed 411 campuses.

Of these campuses, 88 reported

experiencing at least one hate crime;

in fact, these colleges experienced

an average of 3.8 hate crimes each

in 1998, for a total of 334 incidents.

The reporting institutions designated

the motivation for the alleged hate

crimes under five categories: race,

religion, disability, sexual orienta-

tion, and ethnicity/national origin.

The IACLEA report did not include

a separate category for hate crimes

motivated by bias based on gender.

IACLEA statistics indicate that more

than 80 percent of reported hate

crimes were motivated by bias

based on either race or sexual

orientation.

Bias Incidents on Campus:

The Prevalence and Impact

of Prejudice and Harassment

Fortunately, hate crimes occur

with relative infrequency on most

campuses. Bias incidents (acts of

prejudice that are not accompanied

by violence, the threat of violence,

property damage, or other illegal

conduct) are far more common.

Bias incidents may violate some

campus disciplinary or harassment

policies (making them reportable

under the Clery Act), but they do

not violate civil or criminal hate

crime statutes.

Based on discussions, workshops,

and informal surveys with hundreds

of students from institutions ranging

from large state universities to small

liberal arts colleges, students con-

sistently report the widespread use

of degrading language and slurs by

other students directed toward peo-

ple of color, women, homosexuals,

Jews, and others who belong to

groups that have traditionally been

Hate Crimes and Bias Incidents on Campus

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

the target of bias, prejudice, and

violence. Students report hearing

degrading language about women,

gays, and lesbians on a daily basis

and racist, anti-Semitic, and other

slurs on a regular but less frequent

basis.

The widespread use of degrading

language and slurs directed at tradi-

tionally targeted groups has two

serious consequences. First, the use

of such language creates an atmos-

phere that permits conduct to esca-

late from mere words to stronger

words to threats and, ultimately, to

violence. In a significant portion of

campus hate crime cases, the illegal

conduct appears to have escalated

from lower levels of harassment,

beginning with degrading language.

If not challenged or interrupted, the

widespread use of this language sends

the message—often unintended—

that bias and prejudice are accepted

within a campus community. Some

students interpret this message to

mean that more aggressive conduct

may also be acceptable.

Second, even in the absence of

escalation, bias incidents can have

a traumatic impact on students,

staff, and faculty. Members of a

campus community often experi-

ence fear when they are on the

receiving end of degrading language

or slurs or see graffiti that targets

groups in which they are members.

This fear can interfere with the abili-

ty of students to fully focus on their

academic work. Some students who

are the target of bias-motivated

harassment do not react with fear

but with anger. Campus or munici-

pal police may be called to address

physical confrontations between

students who are experiencing bias-

motivated harassment and their

harassers.

HATE CRIMES ON CAMPUS

The responses of campus admin-

istrators and campus and municipal

police departments to hate crimes

and bias incidents that occur on col-

lege campuses have varied greatly.

Although there is no one correct

way to handle every hate crime, the

direct experiences of police officers

and administrators make it possible

to identify common problems they

encounter in responding to campus

hate crimes and those responses

that permit effective investigation

and appropriate community

response.

Some of the most common prob-

lems in responding to hate crimes

are that police are inadequately

trained; students, staff, faculty, and

administrators do not report the

crimes; and administrators do not

adequately disseminate information

to the campus community. Listed

below are descriptions of common

problems, followed by recommend-

ed steps for effectively dealing

with these frequently encountered

challenges.

Problem 1: Campus Police

Officers Need Adequate

Training

Campus police officers who have

not been trained to identify and re-

spond to hate crimes may not be

prepared to properly investigate

III. Response to Campus Hate

Crimes and Bias Incidents

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

incidents and recognize potential

ramifications for the safety of stu-

dents on campus. In addition, if

police officers do not identify an act

of campus violence as a possible

hate crime and do not report it to the

administration, the college or univer-

sity may be hampered in its efforts

to identify trends and begin appropri-

ate prevention and intervention work.

Recommendations

Implement a training program for

campus police. It is essential that

all members of campus police de-

partments (and municipal police

departments that have colleges or

universities within their jurisdictions)

receive training in responding to

and investigating hate crimes. All

officers within a department, includ-

ing command officers, patrol offi-

cers, and detectives, should attend

training sessions. Police depart-

ments have an array of training pro-

grams available to them. In 1998,

the U.S. Department of Justice

launched its National Hate Crime

Training Initiative. This initiative

developed curricula for training

police officers in how to respond

to and investigate hate crimes and

convened national train-the-trainer

conferences around the nation. The

initiative has taught trainers in every

state to conduct half- or full-day

courses. Additionally, the Bureau of

HATE CRIMES ON CAMPUS

Justice Assistance has developed a

20-minute training film for officers,

titled Responding to Hate Crimes,

and the International Association of

Chiefs of Police has developed a 12-

page guide for officers that covers

the major components of investigat-

ing and responding to hate crimes.

Designate a civil rights officer for

each department. Every campus

and municipal police department

with colleges located within its

jurisdiction should consider appoint-

ing at least one officer (preferably

two) to serve as the designated civil

rights officer. A designated civil

rights officer is the primary liaison

between campus administration,

advocacy groups, and other law

enforcement agencies (including

prosecutorial offices). Appointing

a designated civil rights officer lets

the entire campus community know

that responding to and investigating

hate crimes is a priority, and hate

crimes will be handled in a coordi-

nated and consistent way. For more

information about designating a civil

rights officer, see Addressing Hate

Crimes: Six Initiatives That Are

Enhancing the Efforts of Criminal

Justice Practitioners (February

2000, Bureau of Justice Assistance

Hate Crimes Series).

Problem 2: Hate Crimes

and Serious Bias Incidents

Are Not Reported

Police believe that students, staff,

faculty, and administrators often do

not report possible hate crimes and

serious bias incidents to the police.

If police are not informed promptly

of a possible hate crime, they can-

not conduct an immediate investiga-

tion. As a result, physical evidence

(such as graffiti or recorded tele-

phone messages) may be lost, and

witnesses may not be identified and

interviewed. The nonreporting of

such incidents is particularly serious

because many perpetrators of hate

crimes repeat and escalate their

behavior until they are confronted by

authorities. Consequently, police are

deprived of information that may

enable them to halt this pattern of

escalation before a more serious

crime is committed.

Recommendation

Campus officials should develop

a brochure that defines what should

be reported, to whom an incident

should be reported, and when an

incident should be reported. The

brochure should provide clear direc-

tives and be distributed broadly

to faculty, staff, and students. It is

particularly important that these

brochures be distributed to those

persons on campus who are most

likely to learn about possible hate

crimes. For example, individuals

working for the campus housing

and athletics departments, including

student life staff, resident advisors,

coaches, and team captains, should

all receive and review the reporting

guidelines. Student leaders through-

out the university community,

whether or not they are directly in-

volved with the housing or athletics

departments, should also receive

and review reporting guidelines.

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

The Recommendation section under

Problem 4 sets forth guidelines.

Problem 3: Police Do Not

Report Hate Crimes to

Campus Administrators

Some law enforcement agencies

may not have a procedure for regu-

larly informing college administra-

tors of hate crimes or serious bias

incidents that occur in or around a

college campus, particularly when

incidents occur on campus but not

in campus housing. Inadequate

reporting of such incidents by police

deprives administrators of the

opportunity to support students

from the affected or targeted groups,

provide reasonable warnings to

members of the campus community,

and put prevention efforts in place.

Recommendation

Campuses should provide both

campus and municipal police depart-

ments with clear and specific guide-

lines denoting who at the university

or college should be contacted and

under what circumstances. The

reporting guidelines must be con-

cise, identifying who should receive

an initial report and who should

receive followup information. The

guidelines should include information

on how to contact these individuals

in the evening and on weekends,

during campus holidays, and during

vacations to avoid lapses in reporting.

Problem 4: Students,

Staff, and Faculty Do Not

Report Incidents Up the

Administrative Ladder

When students, staff, and faculty

do not report (or do not report in a

timely manner) possible hate crimes

or serious bias incidents up the

administrative ladder, senior college

officials are denied critical informa-

tion. If senior administrators are

unaware of possible hate crimes,

they will not be prepared to take

action against perpetrators, initiate

preventive measures, or respond

knowledgeably to community and

press inquiries.

Recommendation

Campus administrators should

work with campus and municipal

police to develop and disseminate

clear guidelines for reporting hate

crimes. The guidelines should

address the following:

• When and under what circum-

stances students, staff, and facul-

ty should report hate crimes and

bias incidents to campus or

municipal police.

• When and under what circum-

stances students, staff, and facul-

ty should report hate crimes

and bias incidents to college

administrators.

• When campus and municipal

police should report hate crimes

and bias incidents to college

administrators.

Response to Campus Hate Crimes and Bias Incidents

HATE CRIMES ON CAMPUS

The guidelines should include the

names of individuals to contact dur-

ing the week, as well as in the eve-

nings, on weekends, and during

campus holidays and vacations.

Problem 5: Administrators

Do Not Disseminate

Information to the Campus

Community

When a hate crime occurs on

campus, information about the inci-

dent spreads quickly throughout the

campus community via informal

avenues of communication. If col-

lege or university administrators do

not inform the campus about the

incident, several adverse conse-

quences can occur. First, students,

staff, and faculty may receive inac-

curate information about what

occurred. Second, the institution

will lose the opportunity to send a

strong message that bias and hate

will not be tolerated on campus.

Finally, and often most destructive,

when college administrators do not

publicly comment on hate crimes,

they may inadvertently create the

impression that the institution is

insensitive to the problem of hate

crimes.

Recommendations

Disseminate information about

hate crimes. Senior college and

university administrators should

consider promptly disseminating

information through a campuswide

letter or e-mail to provide details on

alleged hate crimes and to strongly

condemn bias-motivated violence,

threats, and property damage. Often,

it will be appropriate to follow this

communication with an open cam-

pus meeting at which members of

the campus community can ask

questions and express their views.

Campus disciplinary proceedings

generally are confidential; therefore,

any dissemination of information

should take confidentiality restric-

tions into account.

Establish a hate crime response

team. Administrators may want to

establish a hate crime response

team that recommends when and

how the college or university should

respond to an alleged hate crime.

Hate crime response teams should

include representatives from the

president’s office, the dean of stu-

dents office, the multicultural office,

the equal opportunity employer

office, and campus and municipal

police departments.

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

IV. Promising Efforts: Responding

to and Preventing Hate Crimes

Colleges, universities, and non-

profit organizations are developing

innovative ways to respond to and

prevent hate crimes. The efforts

described below are only a few

examples of the creative programs

being implemented around the

nation to make our institutions of

higher learning safe for all students.

These programs are replicable and

generally can be implemented with-

out significant expense.

Campuswide Response to

Hate Crimes

Many colleges and universities

have responded to hate crimes on

their campuses with a broad-based

public condemnation of bias, preju-

dice, and violence. These responses

have included the following:

• An open letter from the college

or university president or dean

to the campus community that

explains the hate crime or bias

incident that occurred on cam-

pus, the status of the police

investigation of the alleged hate

crime, and a strong condemna-

tion of bias and violence.

• Meetings open to the entire

campus community in which

the president and other senior

administrators explain what

has occurred and restate the

university’s position against

hate crimes. Students, staff,

and faculty often are invited to

ask questions and voice their

opinions.

As a result of these and other

actions, college administrators have

calmed tensions and fears; addressed

the need of students, staff, and fac-

ulty to receive reliable information;

and gained the trust and confidence

of the campus community.

Hate Crimes Awareness

and Prevention Project

Students at the University of

California at Berkeley have devel-

oped a project to examine hate

crimes and the underlying issues

of bias and prejudice. Through edu-

cation and training the project has

increased awareness of the threat

of hate crimes and fostered a cam-

pus climate that discourages hate

crimes. The project includes a Web

site that provides options for report-

ing hate crimes and lists additional

campus and community resources.

The project sponsored a Hate

Crimes Awareness Week in spring

2000.

HATE CRIMES ON CAMPUS

Combating Prejudice

and Hate on Campus: A

National Student

Colloquium

In March 2000, the Brudnick

Center on Violence and Conflict at

Northeastern University and the

Center for the Prevention of Hate

Violence at the University of South-

ern Maine cosponsored a national

student colloquium to recognize

those students, and their respective

campus organizations, who are

working to confront bias, hate, and

violence. The event provided the

students with the opportunity to

build skills and learn from each

other. More than 300 students and

staff from more than 70 campuses

throughout the country attended

the colloquium. The colloquium was

funded and supported by the U.S.

Department of Education’s Safe and

Drug-Free Schools Program and the

Bureau of Justice Assistance, U.S.

Department of Justice.

Anti-Defamation League

The Anti-Defamation League

(ADL) formed its World of Differ-

ence Institute in 1992 to “define

and advance a discipline of diversity

education.” The institute’s Campus

of Difference Program provides

training for students in groups of

25–40. Facilitated by two ADL staff

members, the program’s goal is to

increase awareness of bias incidents

and hate crimes and encourage uni-

versity students to make proactive

changes on campus. The Campus

of Difference Program also offers

train-the-trainer sessions of varying

duration that enable a campus to

develop 16–20 diversity trainers.

Peer Diversity Education

Several schools have implement-

ed peer diversity education groups

that promote understanding of

diversity on campus. At Texas A&M

University, University Awareness for

Cultural Togetherness (U–ACT) is a

peer diversity education group that

requires participating students to

take a semester-long course in

social justice issues in higher edu-

cation. Members of the group then

conduct workshops and hold

overnight retreats in an effort to

bring students together and create

an environment that is “safe, sup-

portive, and educational.”

New Jersey City University’s

Peers Educating Peers, or “PEP,”

program is based in the school’s

psychology department. About 25

students actively participate in PEP;

they provide outreach on campus

and to the community on a variety

of issues. Other schools, including

Bowdoin College in Maine and the

University of Denver in Colorado,

have successfully integrated peer

diversity efforts into freshman orien-

tation, using films, small group dis-

cussions, and campus speakers to

increase awareness and promote

safety.

Promising Efforts: Responding to and Preventing Hate Crimes

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

Campus Civility Project

The Center for the Prevention of

Hate Violence at the University of

Southern Maine has initiated the

Campus Civility Project to address

the climate of bias, prejudice, and

harassment that exists on our

nation’s campuses. Administrators,

faculty, staff, and student leaders

(such as resident advisors and

captains of sports teams) partici-

pate in 3-hour workshops that help

them develop a fuller understanding

of the harmful effects of degrading

language and slurs. Most important,

the workshops also provide partici-

pants with practical skills for inter-

vening in low-key ways when

students engage in conduct that

demeans, degrades, or frightens

others. The center conducts a 3-day

training-of-trainers conference for

representatives from each partici-

pating campus that will enable the

campuses to conduct their own

workshops for student leaders, staff,

and faculty year after year.

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

V. Conclusion

The hate crimes and bias incidents

that occur on this nation’s college

and university campuses not only

leave scars on the targeted individu-

als but also on entire campuses.

College administrators, police offi-

cers, students, and faculty members

around the nation are devoting

energy and creativity to responding

to and preventing bias, prejudice,

and hate violence. The cumulative

impact of this work on campus will

help ensure that all students—

regardless of gender, race/ethnicity,

sexual orientation, disability, reli-

gion, or age—are physically and

emotionally safe.

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

VI. Appendix: Commonly

Asked Questions About Hate Crimes

and Bias Incidents

What Is a Hate Crime?

The Federal Government, more

than 40 states, and the District of

Columbia have hate crime statutes.

These statutes vary in a number of

ways. Generally, a hate crime is a

crime of violence, property damage,

or threat that is motivated in whole

or in part by an offender’s bias

based on race, religion, ethnicity,

national origin, gender, physical or

mental disability, or sexual orienta-

tion. Most jurisdictions that have

hate crime laws cover bias based on

race, religion, ethnicity, and national

origin, and a smaller number of

states cover bias based on gender,

disability, and sexual orientation.

In addition to criminal statutes,

many states have civil statutes

that authorize the state attorney

general to seek restraining orders

against persons who engage in

bias-motivated violence, threats, or

property damage. It is important to

check the exact wording of the hate

crime statutes applicable in your

state.

What Are Hate or Bias

Incidents?

Hate or bias incidents involve

behavior that is motivated by bias

based on race, religion, ethnicity,

national origin, gender, disability, or

sexual orientation. These incidents

do not involve criminal conduct

such as assault, threats, or property

damage. Bias-motivated degrading

comments often are considered to

be bias incidents. They are not con-

sidered to be hate crimes, however,

because the speaker of those com-

ments has not engaged in criminal

activity.

Why Do We Need To Focus

on This Issue?

Police officers and prosecutors

have learned that hate crimes can

occur on any campus—urban or

rural, large or small, public or pri-

vate. Police and prosecutors have

found that the lack of reported hate

crimes only indicates that students,

staff, or faculty are not reporting

incidents, not that hate crimes are

absent. Moreover, even if a campus

has not experienced a reported hate

HATE CRIMES ON CAMPUS

crime, it is likely that students

and other members of the campus

community are hearing and using

degrading language and slurs direct-

ed at those on campus who are of

a different race, religion, gender, or

sexual orientation. A campus culture

in which the use of slurs becomes

commonplace and accepted soon

becomes an environment in which

slurs can escalate to harassment,

harassment can escalate to threats,

and threats can escalate to physical

violence. As noted previously in this

monograph, an act of violence is the

end result of this pattern. Even if

violence does not occur, the degrad-

ing language alone has a negative

impact on certain students, causing

some to feel uncomfortable or unac-

cepted and others to feel scared.

How Do Police Officers

Determine Whether a Hate

Crime Has Occurred?

Police officers are trained to ex-

amine whether bias indicators exist.

A bias crime indicator is an objec-

tive fact, circumstance, or pattern—

standing alone or in conjunction

with other facts or circumstances—

that suggests that the offender’s

actions were motivated, in whole

or in part, by bias. The presence of

bias indicators does not establish

that a hate crime has occurred.

Rather, the presence of bias indica-

tors prompts police to investigate

the matter further to determine its

motivation. The following factors

may indicate bias motivation. Each

factor is followed by one or more

examples of bias indicators.

Racial, ethnic, gender, and cultur-

al differences exist between the

perpetrator and victim.

• The racial identity, religion,

ethnic/national origin, disability,

or sexual orientation of the vic-

tim differs from that of the

offender.

• The victim is a member of a

group that is overwhelmingly

outnumbered by members of

another group in the area where

the incident occurred.

• The victim was engaged in activ-

ities promoting his or her group.

• The incident coincided with a

holiday or date of particular sig-

nificance to the victim’s group.

Comments, written statements,

and gestures were made. Bias-

related comments, written state-

ments, or gestures were made by

the offender either during, before,

or after the alleged hate crime.

Drawings, markings, symbols,

and graffiti were left. Bias-related

drawings, markings, symbols, or

graffiti were left at the scene of the

incident.

Organized hate groups or their

members were involved. A hate

group has claimed responsibility for

the crime, or symbols of organized

Appendix: Commonly Asked Questions About Hate Crimes and Bias Incidents

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

hate groups were left at the crime

scene.

The victim previously had

received bias-motivated harassing

mail or phone calls. Several bias-

motivated incidents have occurred

in the same area.

The victim’s or witness’s percep-

tion of the incident may affect the

outcome. Victims or witnesses

believe that the incident was moti-

vated by bias.

The location of the incident indi-

cates bias motivation.

• The victim was in or near a place

commonly associated with or fre-

quented by individuals of a par-

ticular racial identity, religion,

ethnic/national origin, disability,

sexual orientation, or gender.

• The incident occurred at or near

a place of worship, a religious

cemetery, the home of a family

that is a minority within a partic-

ular neighborhood, or a gay bar.

Can a Hate Crime Be

Committed With Nothing

More Than Words?

The use of bigoted and prejudiced

language does not in itself violate

hate crime laws. This type of behav-

ior is frequently classified as a bias

incident. However, hate crime laws

apply when words threaten violence.

Similarly, hate crime laws apply

when bias-motivated graffiti dam-

ages or destroys property.

Does Bias Have To Be the

Only Motivation To Charge

Someone With a Hate

Crime?

In general, no, although the an-

swer may depend on how courts

in a particular jurisdiction or state

have interpreted hate crime laws.

It is not uncommon for people to

commit crimes for more than one

reason. Many hate crimes are suc-

cessfully prosecuted even when

motivations in addition to bias are

present.

Is Domestic Violence or

Sexual Assault Against a

Woman Considered a

Hate Crime?

Domestic violence or sexual

assault can be prosecuted as a hate

crime if gender is included in applic-

able hate crime laws and if evidence

can be obtained demonstrating that

the assault was motivated, in whole

or in part, by bias against the victim

because of her gender.

Do Hate Crime Laws

Protect White People?

Yes. Hate crime laws are color-

blind. Racially motivated crimes tar-

geting white people, although far

less common than hate crimes tar-

geting people of color, occur and

the perpetrators are prosecuted.

Many of the hate crimes motivated

by bias against a victim’s religion,

nationality, gender, or sexual orien-

tation are directed at white people.

HATE CRIMES ON CAMPUS

Do Victims Frequently

Fabricate Hate Crimes?

As with any crime, fabricated

complaints about hate crimes do

occur, but very rarely. In fact, police

have found that victims often are

reluctant to report hate crimes or

even acknowledge that what appears

to others to be a hate crime is moti-

vated by bias. The fear and isolation

that hate crime victims feel lead to

underreporting more often than

to fabrication.

Why Should These Laws

Protect Homosexuals?

Hate crime laws prohibit violence,

threats, or property damage moti-

vated by bias. Hate crime laws

have always applied to people who

choose to be in a targeted group,

such as those who choose to convert

to a different religion. The resolution

of the debate over whether gays and

lesbians are genetically predisposed

or choose their sexual orientation is

not relevant under the law. No per-

son should be subject to violence,

threats, or property damage because

of his or her status, whether it be

race, ethnicity, nationality, religion,

gender, physical or mental disability,

or sexual orientation.

Do Hate Crime Laws

Confer Special Rights on

Certain Groups?

Hate crime laws protect every

person in this country. Anyone

could be a victim of a hate crime

because of his or her race, national-

ity, ethnicity, physical or mental dis-

ability, sexual orientation, gender,

or religion. Some people have been

victimized by hate crimes due to a

perpetrator’s mistaken belief that

the victim is of a particular race,

nationality, ethnicity, or sexual ori-

entation. Hate crimes do not confer

special rights on anyone. Rather,

they protect the rights of individuals

to conduct their everyday activi-

ties—to live in their homes, do

their jobs, receive an education—

without being subjected to violence

because of who they are or what

they believe.

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

VII. For More Information

To learn more about the pro-

grams discussed in this monograph,

please contact the following

organization:

Center for the Prevention of Hate

Violence

University of Southern Maine

96 Falmouth Street

P.O. Box 9300

Portland, ME 04104

207–780–4756

Fax: 207–780–5698

Web site: www.cphv.usm.maine.edu

E-mail: [email protected]

For additional copies of this

monograph and others in BJA’s

Hate Crimes Series, contact:

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Clearinghouse

P.O. Box 6000

Rockville, MD 20849–6000

1–800–688–4252

Fax: 301–519–5212

Web site: www.ncjrs.org

Clearinghouse staff are available

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m.

to 7 p.m. eastern time. Ask to be

placed on the BJA mailing list.

For information from other orga-

nizations that are addressing hate

crimes, please contact any of the

organizations listed below.

Anti-Defamation League

823 United Nations Plaza

New York, NY 10017

212–490–2525

Web site: www.adl.org

Arab American Institute

1600 K Street NW., Suite 601

Washington, DC 20006

202–429–9210

Fax: 202–429–9214

Web site: www.aaiusa.org

Bureau of Justice Assistance

810 Seventh Street NW.

Washington, DC 20531

202–616–6500

Fax: 202–305–1367

Web site: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bja

Bureau of Justice Statistics

810 Seventh Street NW.

Washington, DC 20531

202–307–0765

Fax: 202–307–5846

Web site: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs

Community Relations Service

U.S. Department of Justice

600 E Street NW., Suite 6000

Washington, DC 20530

202–305–2935

Fax: 202–305–3009

Web site: www.usdoj.gov/crs

Disability Law Center

11 Beacon Street, Suite 925

Boston, MA 02108

617–723–8455

Fax: 617–723–9125

Web site: www.dlc-ma.org

HATE CRIMES ON CAMPUS

Facing History and Ourselves

National Foundation

16 Hurd Road

Brookline, MA 02445

617–232–1595

Fax: 617–232–0281

Web site: www.facinghistory.org

Federal Bureau of Investigation

J. Edgar Hoover Building

935 Pennsylvania Avenue NW.

Washington, DC 20535

202–324–3000

Fax: 202–324–5310

Web site: www.fbi.gov

Federal Bureau of Investigation

Criminal Justice Information

Services Division

Attn: Uniform Crime Reports

1000 Custer Hollow Road

Clarksburg, WV 26306

304–625–4995

Fax: 304–625–5394

Web site: www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm

Human Rights Campaign

919 18th Street NW., Suite 800

Washington, DC 20006

202–628–4160

Fax: 202–347–5323

Web site: www.hrc.org

International Association of

Chiefs of Police

515 North Washington Street

Alexandria, VA 22314–2357

703–836–6767

Fax: 703–836–4543

Web site: www.theiacp.org

National Asian Pacific American

Legal Consortium

1140 Connecticut Avenue NW.,

Suite 1200

Washington, DC 20036

202–296–2300

Fax: 202–296–2318

Web site: www.napalc.org

National Conference for

Community and Justice

475 Park Avenue South, 19th Floor

New York, NY 10016

212–545–1300

Fax: 212–545–8053

Web site: www.nccj.org

National Congress of American

Indians

1301 Connecticut Avenue NW.,

Suite 200

Washington, DC 20036

202–466–7767

Fax: 202–466–7797

Web site: www.ncai.org

National Council of La Raza

1111 19th Street NW., Suite 1000

Washington, DC 20036

202–785–1670

Fax: 202–776–1792

Web site: www.nclr.org

National Criminal Justice

Association

444 North Capitol Street NW.,

Suite 618

Washington, DC 20001

202–624–1440

Fax: 202–508–3859

Web site: www.ncja.org

For More Information

BUREAU OF JUSTICE ASSISTANCE

National Gay and Lesbian

Task Force

1700 Kalorama Road NW., Suite 101

Washington, DC 20009

202–332–6483

Fax: 202–332–0207

Web site: www.ngltf.org

National Partnership for

Women and Families

1875 Connecticut Avenue NW.,

Suite 710

Washington, DC 20009

202–986–2600

Fax: 202–986–2539

Web site: www.nationalpartnership.org

National Women’s Law Center

11 Dupont Circle NW., Suite 800

Washington, DC 20036

202–588–5180

Fax: 202–588–5185

Web site: www.nwlc.org

Network of Violence

Prevention Practitioners

55 Chapel Street

Newton, MA 02458

617–969–7100

Fax: 617–244–3436

Web site: www2.edc.org/nvpp

Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention

810 Seventh Street NW.

Washington, DC 20531

202–307–5911

Fax: 202–307–2093

Web site: www.ojjdp.ncjrs.org

Office for Victims of Crime

810 Seventh Street NW.

Washington, DC 20531

202–307–5983

Fax: 202–514–6383

Web site: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc

Simon Wiesenthal Center

1399 South Roxbury Drive

Los Angeles, CA 90035

310–553–9036

Fax: 310–553–8007

Web site: www.wiensenthal.com

U.S. Commission on Civil Rights

624 Ninth Street NW., Suite 700

Washington, DC 20425

202–337–7700

Fax: 202–376–7558

Web site: www.usccr.gov

U.S. Department of Education

Safe and Drug-Free Schools

400 Maryland Avenue SW.

Washington, DC 20202

202–260–3954

Fax: 202–260–7767

Web site: www.ed.gov

U.S. Department of Housing and

Urban Development

451 Seventh Street SW.

Washington, DC 20410

202–708–2111

Fax: 202–619–8365

Web site: www.hud.gov

U.S. Department of Justice

Civil Rights Division, Criminal Section

601 D Street NW.

Washington, DC 20530

202–514–3204

Fax: 202–514–8336

Web site: www.usdoj.gov

HATE CRIMES ON CAMPUS

Violence Against Women Office

810 Seventh Street NW.

Washington, DC 20531

202–307–6026

Fax: 202–305–2589

Web site: www.ojp.usdoj.gov/vawo

For additional information about

BJA programs, visit the BJA Web

site at www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bja or

contact:

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Clearinghouse

P.O. Box 6000

Rockville, MD 20849–6000

1–800–688–4252

Web site: www.ncjrs.org

Clearinghouse staff are available

Monday through Friday, 8:30 a.m.

to 7 p.m. eastern time. Ask to be

placed on the BJA mailing list.

U.S. Department of Justice

Response Center

1–800–421–6770 or 202–307–1480

Response Center staff are available

Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. to

5 p.m. eastern time.

Bureau of Justice Assistance

Information

General Information

❒ Mail

P.O. Box 6000

Rockville, MD 20849–6000

❒ Visit

2277 Research Boulevard

Rockville, MD 20850

❒ Telephone

1–800–688–4252

Monday through Friday

8:30 a.m. to 7 p.m.

eastern time

❒ Fax

301–519–5212

❒ Fax on Demand

1–800–688–4252

Callers may contact the U.S. Department of Justice Response Center for general informa-

tion or specific needs, such as assistance in submitting grant applications and information

about training. To contact the Response Center, call 1–800–421–6770 or write to 1100

Vermont Avenue NW., Washington, DC 20005.

Indepth Information

For more indepth information about BJA, its programs, and its funding opportunities,

requesters can call the BJA Clearinghouse. The BJA Clearinghouse, a component of the

National Criminal Justice Reference Service (NCJRS), shares BJA program information

with state and local agencies and community groups across the country. Information spe-

cialists are available to provide reference and referral services, publication distribution,

participation and support for conferences, and other networking and outreach activities.

The Clearinghouse can be reached by

❒ BJA Home Page

www.ojp.usdoj.gov/BJA

❒ NCJRS Home Page

www.ncjrs.org

❒ E-mail

[email protected]

❒ JUSTINFO Newsletter

E-mail to [email protected]

Leave the subject line blank

In the body of the message,

type:

subscribe justinfo

[your name]