A dominant justification for hate crime laws is that they serve a crucial expressive function—sending messages of valuation to victims, and of denunciation to defendants. Yet, as this Essay will demonstrate, the focus on criminalizing hate—through the enactment of either sentencing enhancements or stand-alone hate crime statutes—has resulted in a thin conception of messaging that fails to recognize the limitations of the criminal law in addressing psychic harm. This Essay argues that a more robust approach to addressing hate crimes must consider alternatives—beyond incarceration—that would center the trauma associated with hate crimes. This includes restorative justice models that might benefit both victims and defendants. Ultimately, the Essay calls into question conventional assumptions about the expressive function of hate crime laws while demonstrating the importance of a broad, holistic, and interdisciplinary lens, as well as interventions beyond the parameters of criminal law.

仇恨犯罪法的一个主要理由是它们具有重要的表达功能——向受害者发送估价信息，向被告发送谴责信息。然而，正如本文将展示的那样，将仇恨定为刑事犯罪的重点——通过增加量刑或单独制定仇恨犯罪法规——导致了一种薄弱的信息传递概念，未能认识到刑法在解决心理问题方面的局限性伤害。这篇文章认为，解决仇恨犯罪的更强有力的方法必须考虑替代方案——除了监禁——这将集中与仇恨犯罪相关的创伤。这包括可能对受害者和被告都有利的恢复性司法模式。最终，