Wisconsin V. Mitchell Case Analysis
Introduction
This paper analyzes the definition of hate crime in the Wisconsin system, which is defined as to target a person or a property offensively, involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, gender identity, or national origin. Through the critical analysis of Wisconsin v. Mitchell, it argues that an important element which is that the First Amendment does not protect violence. It enhances the maximum penalty for act motivated by a discriminatory point of view.
IRAC Analysis
Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476 (1993)
Fact:
A young black man his name is Mitchell, and a group of his friends beat up a withe boy in Wisconsin. Mitchell got his idea of the attack after watching white man beat up a black boy in a movie, and he asked his friends if they want to beat the withe boy who was walking across the street. …show more content…
The court held that Mitchell's First Amendment rights were not violated by the application of the penalty-enhancement provision in sentencing him.
Critical analysis
This case I believe has a significant impact in the development of the hate crimes and First Amanda right. More specifically it protects the expression of a belief but not acting upon that belief if a crime is committed. It addresses the principle that freedom does not give anyone the right to offense different race physically. As it can be seen the legal system defend the victim, and the decision expresses that a person can convict for penalty enhancement regardless of the First Amanda. Many States have passed penalty enhancement provisions similar to the Wisconsin statute at issue in this case.
Conclusion
Wisconsin v. Mitchell was based on the tradition of the Court protecting speech. This case established a significant key in Untied State constitution rights. The freedom to have racist opinions does not give Americans the right to take action and commit crimes for racist
This paper analyzes the definition of hate crime in the Wisconsin system, which is defined as to target a person or a property offensively, involving actual or perceived race, color, religion, gender identity, or national origin. Through the critical analysis of Wisconsin v. Mitchell, it argues that an important element which is that the First Amendment does not protect violence. It enhances the maximum penalty for act motivated by a discriminatory point of view.
IRAC Analysis
Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476 (1993)
Fact:
A young black man his name is Mitchell, and a group of his friends beat up a withe boy in Wisconsin. Mitchell got his idea of the attack after watching white man beat up a black boy in a movie, and he asked his friends if they want to beat the withe boy who was walking across the street. …show more content…
The court held that Mitchell's First Amendment rights were not violated by the application of the penalty-enhancement provision in sentencing him.
Critical analysis
This case I believe has a significant impact in the development of the hate crimes and First Amanda right. More specifically it protects the expression of a belief but not acting upon that belief if a crime is committed. It addresses the principle that freedom does not give anyone the right to offense different race physically. As it can be seen the legal system defend the victim, and the decision expresses that a person can convict for penalty enhancement regardless of the First Amanda. Many States have passed penalty enhancement provisions similar to the Wisconsin statute at issue in this case.
Conclusion
Wisconsin v. Mitchell was based on the tradition of the Court protecting speech. This case established a significant key in Untied State constitution rights. The freedom to have racist opinions does not give Americans the right to take action and commit crimes for racist