About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline



110 Cal. L. Rev. 489 (2022)
Hate Crime, Terrorism, and the Framing of White Supremacist Violence

handle is hein.journals/calr110 and id is 498 raw text is: Hate Crimes, Terrorism, and the Framing
of White Supremacist Violence
Shirin Sinnar*
Even before the assault on the Capitol on January 6, 2021, a
rising chorus of policymakers and pundits had called for treating
White supremacist violence as terrorism. After multiple mass
shootings motivated by White supremacist ideology, commentators
argued that the hate crime label failed to convey the political nature
of the violence or assign it the stigma and attention it deserved. This
Article unpacks the historical roots and contemporary implications of
the hate crimes and terrorism frames. First, it explains how the hate
crimes and terrorism frames took hold in our law and culture, such
that they now provide alternative frames for interpreting and
responding to White supremacist violence. It draws on 'frame
analysis from a variety of disciplines and the work of sociologists,
historians, and legal scholars to explain the historical evolution of the
hate crimes and terrorism frames. Second, the Article contends that
the decision to frame violence as hate crimes or terrorism matters
because these frames diverge starkly in their conceptualization and
legal treatment offive issues: the nature and severity of the threat; the
reactive versus preventative nature of the law enforcement response;
the perceived redeemability ofperpetrators; the identity of victims and
perpetrators; and the role of individual rights and courts. Calls to treat
White supremacist violence as terrorism push responses closer
towards features of the terrorism frame, though legal, cultural, and
political constraints would prevent a complete adoption of that frame.
Third, the Article argues that neither the hate crimes nor terrorism
frame is consistent with evolving notions of racial justice. The move to
reframe White supremacist violence as terrorism comes with grave
risks: it shifts institutional power towards a national security
apparatus and experts detached from affected communities; it
entrenches preemptive law enforcement practices that investigate and
imprison people on suspicion offuture threats; and it risks the greater
targeting of subordinated communities and groups appearing to
challenge the dominant racial and socioeconomic order. The response
to White supremacist violence should begin with a critical
reexamination of both frames.

489