The Thirteenth Amendment and Hate Crimes
A few weeks ago the President signed the Matthew Shepard Hate Crimes Prevention Act into law. The Office of Legal Counsel issued an opinion concluding that the Act is constitutional under Section Two of the Thirteenth Amendment, relying heavily on the Second Circuit’s analysis in United States v. Nelson, 277 F.3d 164 (2d Cir. 2002).
This could be a significant doctrinal development. The OLC’s analysis, of course, was driven by concern about whether a federal hate crimes bill would be vulnerable under the Supreme Court’s holding in United States v. Morrison. There’s more going on here though. The Thirteenth Amendment, unlike the Fourteenth, does not have a state action requirement. To the extent that lawyers start using the Thirteenth to sustain congressional action on racial discrimination, that would render Morrison a dead letter. This line of thought was rejected in the Civil Rights Cases (over Justice Harlan’s dissent), but may be making a comeback.