Cover image for Criminal Law Dealing with Hate Crimes : Functional Comparative Law Germany vs. USA.
Criminal Law Dealing with Hate Crimes : Functional Comparative Law Germany vs. USA.
Title:
Criminal Law Dealing with Hate Crimes : Functional Comparative Law Germany vs. USA.
Author:
Shavers, Christine Marie.
ISBN:
9783653036411
Personal Author:
Physical Description:
1 online resource (408 pages)
Series:
Schriften zum Strafrecht und Strafprozeßrecht ; v.117

Schriften zum Strafrecht und Strafprozeßrecht
Contents:
Cover -- Acknowledgements -- Translation Index of Selected Judicial Terms -- Contents -- Preface -- Chapter 1 Methodical Introduction -- A. The Term 'Comparative Law' -- B. Classification and Derivation of Comparative Law from other Disciplines -- 1. Classification of Comparative Law as a "pure science" -- 2. Comparative Law, a Part of Jurisprudence? -- 3. Resume -- C. Tasks and Aims of Comparative Law -- D. Methods of Comparative Law -- 1. Case Method and Scientific-Theoretical Comparative Law -- 2. The Functional Method of Comparative Law -- 3. The Delineation of Comparative Law to other Disciplines -- Chapter 2 Preparatory Country Report -- A. Choosing the Appropriate Reference Country -- B. The U.S. Legal System -- 1. The Common Law System -- 1.1. Origin and Development of the Common Law in the United States of America -- 1.2. Common Law in the United States of America as of today -- 2. The U.S. Constitution -- 2.1. Structure and form of the U.S. Constitution -- 2.2. Separation of Powers -- 2.3. Constitutional Powers -- 2.4. Summary -- 3. U. S. American Criminal Law -- 3.1. Constitutional Base of Criminal Law -- 3.2. Legislative Competence and Institution -- 3.2.1. Federal Matters -- 3.2.1.1. Federal Legislative Competence -- 3.2.1.2. Federal Legislative Institution -- 3.2.2. State Matters -- 3.2.2.1. State Legislative Competence -- 3.2.2.2. State Legislative Institution -- 3.2.3. Summary -- 3.3. Manifestations of Criminal Law in the United States of America -- 3.3.1. Federal Criminal Law -- 3.3.2. State Criminal law -- 3.3.3. Summary -- 3.4. Jurisdiction and Competence of Criminal Courts -- 3.4.1. Federal Matters -- 3.4.1.1. Federal Courts -- 3.4.1.2. Applicable Federal Law -- 3.4.2. State Matters -- 3.4.2.1. State Courts -- 3.4.2.2. Applicable State Law -- 3.4.3. Summary -- C. The German Legal System -- 1. The Roman - Germanic Law System.

1.1. Origin and Development of Roman - Germanic Law in Germany -- 1.2. Roman - Germanic Law in Germany as of today -- 2. The German Constitution -- 2.1. Structure and Form of the German Constitution -- 2.2. Separation of Powers -- 2.3. Constitutional Powers -- 2.4. Summary -- 3. German Criminal Law -- 3.1. Constitutional Base of Criminal Law -- 3.2. Legislative Competence and Institution -- 3.3. Competence and Jurisdiction of Criminal Courts -- 3.4. Manifestation of Criminal Law -- 3.4.1. Enhancing Criminal Penalties according to German Criminal Law Doctrine -- 3.4.1.1. Aggravated Statute -- 3.4.1.2. Aggravated Ruling Example -- 3.4.1.3. Transfer of the General Penalty Enhancement Methodology to the matter of Hate Crime -- 3.4.2. Classification of Offenses -- 3.5. Sense and Purpose of Penalty according to the German Legal Doctrine -- 3.5.1. Absolute Penal Theory -- 3.5.2. Relative Penal Theory -- 3.5.2.1. General Prevention Theory -- 3.5.2.2. Specific Prevention Theory -- 3.5.3. Unification Theories -- 3.5.4. Summary -- D. Determination of the Legitimate Ambit of Criminal Law in Both Countries -- 1. Purpose of Criminal Law according to the American Penal TheoryPursuant to the prevailing U.S. opinion, the "[...] purpose for which power can -- 1.1. Content of the American Penal Theory: Harm Principle -- 1.1.1. Liberty-Limiting Principles -- 1.1.1.1. Offense-Principle -- 1.1.1.2. Legal Paternalism -- 1.1.1.3. Legal Moralism -- 1.1.1.4. Summary -- 1.1.2. Result: Harm-Principle as Main Principle among Possible Others -- 1.1.2.1. Word Meaning of 'Harm' in the Context of the Harm Principle -- a) Setback of Interests -- b) The Need to "Wrong" the Other -- c) Violation of Rights -- 1.1.2.2. Summary: Word Meaning of 'Harm' in the Context of the Harm Principle -- 1.2. Summary: Content of the American Penal Theory: Harm Principle.

2. Purpose of Criminal Law according to the German Penal Theory -- 2.1. Content of the German Legal Good Theory -- 2.1.1. Inbuilt or System-Critical Understanding of the Legal Good Doctrine -- 2.1.1.1. Inbuilt Understanding of the Legal Good Doctrine -- 2.1.1.2. System-Critical Understanding of the Legal Good Doctrine -- 2.1.2. Intermediate Result: System-Critical Understanding of the Legal Good Doctrine -- 2.1.3. Individual- and Collective Goods -- 2.1.4. Substantiality of the Term Legal Good -- 2.1.5. Intermediate Summary -- 2.1.6. Linking the Legal Good Theory to the Social Theory -- 2.1.7. Constitutional Guideposts -- 2.1.8. Result of a Critical Understanding of the Legal Good Theory -- 2.2. Result according the Content of the German Legal Good Theory -- 3. Purpose of Criminal Law according to the American and the German Penal Theory -- Chapter 3 Hate Crime in the United States of America -- A. Course of Action -- B. Emergence of the Hate Crime Concept in the USA -- 1. The Hate Crime Concept and the Role of Social Movements -- 1.1. Social Movements rumored to be the Author of the SocialPhenomenon Hate Crime -- 1.2. Propagation of the Term "Hate Crime" among American Society -- 1.3. Hate Crime Legislation as Problem-Solving Approach induced bySocial Movements -- 1.4. Influence of Social Movements on the Wording and the Compositionof Hate Crime Laws -- 2. Clarifying the Role of Social Movements -- 2.1. Social Problem "Hate Crime" - Real or Constructed? -- 2.2. Propagation of the Term "Hate Crime" among American Society -- 2.3. Hate Crime Legislation as a Problem - Solving Approach -- 2.4. Influences on the Wording and the Composition of Hate Crime Laws -- 3. Conclusion: Emergence of the Hate Crime Concept in the USA -- C. Beginnings of Hate Crime Legislation -- D. Effective Hate Crime Laws in the United States of America.

1. Federal Hate Crime Laws -- 1.1. Civil Rights Legislation -- 1.2. Hate Crime Statistic Act of 1990 -- 1.3. Violence Against Women Act -- 1.4. Hate Crime Sentencing Enhancement Act of 1994 -- 1.5. Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act -- 1.6. Conclusion of Current Federal Hate Crime Legislation -- 2. State Hate Crime Laws -- 2.1. The Launch of a Model Law -- 2.2. Legal Formation of State Law -- 2.2.1. Hate Crime Reporting Statutes -- 2.2.2. Paramilitary Training Laws -- 2.2.3. Legislation for Criminalizing Bias-Motivated Behavior -- 2.2.3.1. Substantial Hate Crime Statutes -- a) Substantial Hate Crime Statutes refering to previously PenalizedBehavior -- b) "Real" Substantial Hate Crime Statutes -- aa) Cross Burning Legislation -- bb) Intimidation Statutes -- cc) State Civil Rights Laws -- dd) Conclusion "Real" Substantive Hate Crime Statutes -- 2.2.3.2. Sentencing Enhancement Laws -- 2.2.3.3. Overview of Various State Laws and their provided Definition ofHate Crime -- a) Alabama -- b) California -- c) Connecticut -- d) Georgia -- e) Louisiana -- f) Virginia -- g) Washington -- 3. Ambiguity of Hate Crime Laws in the American Nation -- E. Brief Look at the American Justification of Hate Crime Laws -- F. The Standards set by U. S. Supreme Courts -- G. Conclusion: Hate Crime in the United States of America -- Chapter 4 Hate Crime in Germany -- A. Historical Background of Hate Crime in its Social and Criminal Political Context (Brief Overview) -- B. The Hate Crime "Concept" in Germany -- 1. Early Beginnings of Data Collection -- 2. Data Collection in the Present Day -- 3. Comparison -- 4. Operation of the Data Acquisition System -- 5. Hate Crime Situation in Case Numbers -- 6. Significance of these Numbers -- 7. Result: German Hate Crime "Concept" -- C. Legal Dealing with Hate Crime.

1. Draft Bill of Baden-Wuerttemberg Drs. 564/00, dated September 21, 2000 -- 2. Draft Bill of Brandenburg Drs. 577/00, dated September 26, 2000 -- 3. Draft Bill of Mecklenburg-Vorpommern Drs. 759/00, dated November 16, 2000 -- 4. Draft Bill of Brandenburg/Sachsen-Anhalt Drs. 572/07, dated August 20, 2007 -- 5. Draft Bill of the Federal Council Drs. 458/08, dated July 4, 2008 -- 6. Draft Bill of the Federal Council Drs. 17/9345, dated April 18, 2012 -- 7. Descriptive Summary and Evaluation of the Draft Laws -- 8. Symbolic Reasoning of Hate Crime Law -- 9. Comparison of the German Drafts with American Laws on Hate Crimes -- 10. Conclusion Legal Dealing with Hate Crime -- D. Judicial Dealing with Hate Crime -- 1. Judicial Recognition of Bias-Motivation in Homicide -- 2. Judicial Recognition of Bias-Motivation Apart from Homicides -- 3. Hate Crime in the Light of Section 46 Penal Code -- 4. Limited Verifiability of Judicial Sentencing Practice -- 5. Conclusion -- E. Parenthesis -- 1. European Criminal Law Initiatives -- 1.1. Demands of ECRI for Fighting Hate Crime -- 1.2. Demands of the OSCE for Fighting Hate Crime -- 2. Conclusion -- F. Brief Review -- G. Eligibility Check of Hate Crime Legislation according to German Criminal Law Doctrine -- 1. The Enactment of a Substantive Norm to Punish Hateful and Bias-Motivated Criminal Behavior -- 1.1. Possible Goods Protected by a Hate Crime Law -- 1.1.1. Human Dignity of the Immediate Victim -- 1.1.2. Human Dignity of the Victim's Community -- 1.1.3. Public Peace -- 1.2. Priority of Protected Legal Goods -- 1.3. Legitimacy of Hate Crime Legislation according to the Legal Good Doctrine -- 1.3.1. Precepts of the Legal Good Doctrine -- 1.3.2. Legitimization of Hate Crime Legislation according to the Social Theory -- 1.3.3. Legitimization of Hate Crime Legislation according to Constitutional Provisions.

1.3.3.1. Constitutional Obligation to enact Hate Crime Penal Law.
Abstract:
This study aims at providing a contribution to the current issue of hate crime. It analyzes the possibilities which are served by the German and the US American law to penalize bias-motivated crimes, while considering the historical and social background of both societies. It is questioned which legal goods are harmed by the committal of hate crime and whether the German penal law is suitable to address the wrong of hate crime and whether it is capable of properly punishing this sort of crime in respect to the blameworthiness of the offender. By applying the functional method of law comparison, understandings regarding the handlings of hate crimes in the USA and in Germany are exploited and, as a result, possible solutions for weaknesses of the prevailing law are offered.
Local Note:
Electronic reproduction. Ann Arbor, Michigan : ProQuest Ebook Central, 2017. Available via World Wide Web. Access may be limited to ProQuest Ebook Central affiliated libraries.
Electronic Access:
Click to View
Holds: Copies: