The course of justice can only have two outcomes, acquittal or conviction. In case of conviction, the convicted party can either be satisfied or unsatisfied by the verdict. Luckily, one can file an appeal if not satisfied with the verdict. This paper focuses on the (Wisconsin v. Mitchell) Supreme Court's decision intending to establish if the verdict was justified. I do agree with the verdict upholding sentencing enhancements for hate crimes. Mitchell went to the Circuit Court to pursue post-conviction reprieve, but unfortunately, the request was denied ("Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476 (1993)", 2019). He then appealed to the Wisconsin Appellate. According to him, the enhanced sentence was a violation of his First Amendment rights. The appellate courts rejected the case, and he was forced to appeal to the Supreme Court. Fortunately, the court reiterated the violation of his First Amendment Rights.
Although the Supreme Court of Wisconsin invalidated the statute for violating the First Amendment, it is common for courts to take motive into the punishment of criminals. In this case, courts have for long meted out higher sentences for the people acting with bad motives and lenient verdicts for those acting with good motives. The courts have, in the past, upheld the constitutionality of state as well as federal laws barring discrimination based on gender or race. The Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects the workers against acumen based on nationality, sex, religion, color as well as race ("Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964", 2019). The argument of Mitchell's that the statute was unconstitutionally overbroad was considered by the court owing to the argument's 'chilling effect' on free speech ("FindLaw's the United States Supreme Court case and opinions." 2019).
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
References
FindLaw's the United States Supreme Court case and opinions. (2019). Retrieved 27 October 2019, from https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/508/476.html
First Amendment - penalty enhancement for hate crimes: content regulation, questionable state interests, and non-traditional sentencing.. (n.d.) >The Free Library. (2014). Retrieved Oct 27 2019 from https://www.thefreelibrary.com/First+Amendment+- +penalty+enhancement+for+hate+crimes%3a+content...-a015710036
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. (2019). Retrieved 27 October 2019, from https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/statutes/titlevii.cfm
Wisconsin v. Mitchell, 508 U.S. 476 (1993). (2019). Retrieved 27 October 2019, from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/508/476/
